I recently received a newsletter from Astral Pulse which may be of interest to many here..

The Nativity Agenda
-------------------

It is understandable that at this traditional time of the year many
people are questioning the biblical origins of Christmas - the
"Nativity".

The highly globally respected BBC New published this article
recently:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7793106.stm

This in summary relates to a survey carried out by the Church, which
revealed that of the 1000 people questioned, 70%, including many
who profess to being Christian, no longer believe in the "Nativity".

And we must keep in Mind that the birth of Jesus is one of the most
iconic and crucial aspects of the New Testament, and one that
underpins the very existence of the Christian Religion itself,
along with the "crucifixion" and "resurrection" mythologies.

Why they are mythologies we will see a little later.

This though means that the dire warnings of the church as to the
consequences for all those who fail to be "obedient to God" and to
"believe in and respect" the life circumstances and meaning of
"his" only "son" as well as accepting him as their "saviour", are
no longer holding the controlling power they once did - and up
until not so many years ago at that.

We cannot be "saved" by "others" for two fundamental reasons:

1. There are no "others", we are all One, and therefore our
destinies are inexorably linked. Each influences the Whole.

2. As individuated aspects and Expressions of Source Energy we are
blessed with Freewill and Mind to Evolve in accordance with how we
best make use of the powers, abilities and Mind that Source has
provided us with - which are Infinite and Eternal - as Source.

In short - more of  humanity is finally beginning to think for
themselves.

This is a strong indicator that finally, as humanity awakens, the
foundations of these old systems of "belief" are crumbling like the
fabled walls of Jericho, and will, in time, become yet another
useless ruin, ancient relics discarded and left behind by humanity
as they move on to greater levels of understanding, Spirituality
and Closeness with our True Source,just as before, when humanity
abandoned their great temples dedicated to their numerous pantheons
of god-deities, moving from a polytheic to a monotheic structure in
the process.

This time though is different.

Humanity, instead of grasping at yet another religion that they are
offered as a pre-packaged system of "belief" that does all thinking
for you, and which conveniently simply comes their way, this time
people around the world wish only to grasp Truth, Freedom and
Enlightenment, thus fulfilling the next great evolutionary step
from a monotheic deity based doctrine, to a realisation that the
True God is not after all a deity, but rather the Source of All
Creation in the Universe of Which we are an Inseparable Aspect and
Divine Expression instead of being a subservient slave to it.

These will endure through Eternity, because the foundations are
have been built by Source and are therefore Eternal - foundations
that cannot and must not be buried, ever again, by those who follow
the dark forces, the forces that are "anti to Christ" - the Highest
Energy and Embodiment of Freedom, Truth and Unconditional Love.

Ultimately absolute Truth is enduring where all else to the
contrary sooner or later must fall as all others inexorably have.

When referring to religion, I do not include Buddhism, Hinduism or
Taoism - these are cultures, ways of life, built upon a solid and
virtuous foundation of Truth, that neither seeks to control,
dis-empower, or disconnect from the Light, their adherents.

Quite the contrary in fact - these are noble, worthy ways of life
that seek to empower, to and to provide a path to Source, God
through Understanding and effort supported by Divine Freewill.

So what then of the "Nativity" - an icon of Christmas in recent
centuries.

The creation of the Nativity must been seen against the backdrop of
how the Roman Church originally came in to being in the first place.

The ultimate agenda of Emperor "Saint Constantine" was to create an
alternative mode of far reaching power and control over the Roman
Empire and beyond, in the face of the crumbling Imperial Army and
global territories and in the face of increasing resistance by
various groups of "barbarians" who were rapidly eroding the Roman
Empire through force.

This process was a visible manifestation of Cause and Effect in
that the Roman Imperial Army originally took these lands which did
not belong to them by force.

Saint Constantine was ruthless - he even executed his own eldest
son - but a brilliant strategist, and he realised that the one thing
everyone feared more then any other was their "gods" or "deities".

Ultimately the entire course of humanity, and of their greatest
achievements such as the great pyramids of Mesoamerica can be
traced to how they perceived and approached their "gods", and most
importantly how these "gods" could be "appeased" and "on their side",
instead of incurring their mighty "wrath" of these deity "Gods" in
the form of great storms, crop failures, famines, draughts and so on.

The measure of their fear can be observed in the monumental efforts
and achievement, often in the form of massive pyramids constructed
from stone blocks so heavy that even the largest cranes today could
not lift them, positioning them hundreds of feet in the air with
geometric precision.

How ancient races such as the Egyptians, Maya and Teotihuacano's
achieved these "super-human" feats is still unknown to this day.

Fear of the blessings or vengeance of Gods or God is an extremely
powerful, primal force, which Constantine was very familiar with.

To Constantine God was a powerful "weapon" to bring humans to their
knees and believe and do almost anything to remain in favour -
especially after the misinformation they perpetuated about the
nature of "death", and in particular the false doctrine of "hell"
and of "satan" or "Lucifer".

As we have already determined in a previous newsletter, the true
identity of "Lucifer" is the Human Ego Mind which, in the
beginning, became detached from the Christ Mind of Source, that the
Luciferian Human Ego Mind could, through the ongoing process of
Perfection through Experience granted through Freewill, to
Ultimately return the Christ Mind from Whence it originally came.

The creation of the Canon of the New Testament was the result of
the efforts of the Constantine to rally the hitherto followers of
the pagan deities around this new "Christ figure" known as Yeshua,
who was the most recent, and convenient respected teacher in the
area of the time some 350 years before, resulting in plenty of
separate but scattered texts that could be made in to the basis, or
canon of a "new religion" based on fear, power and control.

So all Constantine needed to do now was how to make the "new
religion" palatable to the Romans, on the basis that once it had been
accepted by the Romans it would likely be accepted throughout the
world - they would of course force it upon what remains of their
Empire threat of death - a policy that became a trademark of the
Roman church for centuries to come.

So all the Roman Church under Constantine needed to do was to
"graft" on to the beginning and end of the Yeshua "story" of the "new
religion",sequences of events that would be most acceptable to
the majority of Romans, and in turn to the remainder of the world.

Constantine had zero regard for Jesus, Yeshua, except as an
instrument of control and power.

The Romans at this time worshipped the deity Mithra, their Sun god,
the story of whom had followed the same sequence of mythology for
thousands of years - 15 times previously in fact, commencing with
Osiris in Ancient Egypt.

The other ploy was to then replace the Mithraic pagan festivals
with the new Roman Church corresponding festivals, based upon the
fact that everything in the middle would take care of itself, and
the festivals that the Romans had become accustomed to may continue.

So this then is precisely what happened.

As an aside, another very long story, the Gospels of the Bible
became hopelessly corrupted in a very short time indeed.

The "Apostles" - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - had most likely
already "passed on" before the Gospels were placed on paper by person
or persons unknown, but who in any event spoke Ancient Greek as
their native language and not the Aramaic of Jesus or Disciples.

Jesus, being born to a Jewish family, spoke Aramaic which is
completely different to Greek. Aramaic is a poetic language that
can be perceived, understood and interpreted in many different ways
depending on the reader - much like the Bible itself in fact. So
Aramaic must always be taken in a proper context, and never
literally as the Greek speaking authors of Matthew, Mark, Luke and
John, most clearly did.

Of course by then the true context was long gone, so there were no
longer any points of reference - but this was of no relevance to
Constantine, because he created his own "interpretation" in
accordance with his global controlling ambitions which proved to be
extremely successful. Even Constantine could never have envisaged
over one billion people prostrating themselves before this
instrument of control and fear he created from one of the very
greatest teachers of the Light and the Truth that ever walked the
planet - Jesus - Jeshua - a Divine embodiment of the Christ Light
Energy of our Source.

We also have to take in to account that the life and teachings of
Jesus must have been handed down by mouth through stories through
anecdotes which, like the party game "Chinese Whispers" will no
doubt have been distorted, glorified and embellished in the process.

So whoever wrote down the texts of what would become the original
Gospels, probably lost most of the true life and times of Yeshua -
the true Jewish name of "Jesus", which was the Greek name assigned
to him, right there, and much of Yeshua's true teachings lost in
transliteration upon transliteration, misinterpretation, by
misinterpretation, deliberate alteration by deliberate alteration.

Later it was transliterated to Latin and eventually into medieval
English which is where it remains today for effect. All those
"thee's, thou's, hath's" etc sound much more convincing than their
modern day English equivalents which would not have the same
mystery about them.

It is all of an immense, extremely clever but equally damaging ploy.

But anyway, the Roman Church removed parts and changed parts down
through the centuries to support their own agenda of power and
control, so any overall representation of the teachings of Jesus
were completely corrupted and all but meaningless except to those
who were equipped to see the deeper meanings of the words of Jesus
which the theologians never did or could see - and neither were
they intended to - Jesus said this himself:

"And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto
them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is
given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but
to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given,
and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him
shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in
parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not,
neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy
of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not
understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive, For
this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of
hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they
should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should
understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should
heal them". But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears,
for they hear. For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and
righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and
have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and
have not heard them. Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower."
--Matthew 13:10-18

Yes - the Prophecy of Isaiah was certainly fulfiled as Yeshua said
- and Constantine was the vehicle of that fulfilment.

So from a fundamental perspective, the New Testament became totally
corrupted, even it it represented an accurate account of biblical
events in the region to start with which is highly doubtful - much
of it would have been myth, glorifications of events and anecdote.

The Old Testament remains pure and true to its roots, because it
remains mostly totally unchanged and continuous in its original
Hebrew, with no apparent hidden agenda attached, and to this extent
remains faithful to Abraham - the father of all Abramic doctrines.

The same therefore applies to the books of the Jewish religion
which remain true to their roots - Abraham - for the same reason.

But then let us take a look at the Nativity a little more closely.

Did the "birth" event take place in Bethlehem?

Almost certainly not.

This myth became necessary due to a "prophecy" hundreds of year
before by the Jewish King David, which stated that the "messiah" or
"saviour" would be born in Bethlehem.

It was almost certain, based upon historical evidence, that Jesus
was actually born in Nazareth, which is the real reason he is known
as "Jesus of Nazareth".

It was felt necessary to ensure the prophecy of David be seen to
have come to pass, in order that his authenticity as the "messiah"
could later be established from his Jewish roots.

The "census" that Jesus and Mary went to Bethlehem for according to
the story is a myth. The Romans held their first census about 250
years later, and in any case why would Nazarene people be required
to travel to Bethlehem many miles away? It makes no sense at all.

Was Jesus a "virgin" birth of his mother Mary?

This is obviously a very, very sensitive subject. The actual
recorded history of the region is very telling. The most likely
answer, by far to the point of being all but certain is - no - this
was not a virgin birth.

The likely circumstances of the conception would shock too many
people, and is in any case moot, and in no way diminishes the
standing of Mary as a person.

Was Joseph the Father - almost certainly not.

Being an unmarried mother in that era, regardless of how and why, was
considered shameful, and so families rally round to conceal the
true circumstances of a pregnancy in order to save family honour
and against any possible reprisals by bigots and others.

There is also rather glaring evidence to suggest that considerable
effort was made to establish Joseph's relationship to Yeshua at the
start of the Gospel of Matthew with  all the generations of Joseph
being meticulously listed until finally in Matthew 1:16 we find:

"And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born
Jesus, who is called Christ".

Now surely we are being led to believe that this was a "virgin"
birth?

If this was the case, Joseph could not, by that logic, have been the
genetic father.

So why spend the first 16 pages of Matthew establishing Joseph's
relationship to Jesus who was "born of Joseph" when the fundamental
basis of the Christian doctrine is that Jesus was "born" of God
through the "Holy Spirit" - Universal Life Energy.

This was however such a popular theme that even in the Star Wars
Movies, Anakin Skywalker was apparently a "virgin birth" of his
mother Shmi through the "Force" - Universal Life Energy.

This is, whether the author realises or not, an excellent metaphor
for the Roman Church Synthesis and therefore how they viewed
themselves.

Anakin Skywalker was turned to the "dark side of the force" and
became "Darth Vader", and we all know what happened then.

Darth vader created the dark Galactic Empire under the control of the
"dark side" - the dark forces.

Could Emperor "Saint Constantine, who was purporting to be a force
for good in the Roman Empire - after all - he was "canonised" - be
really a metaphor for the way Galactic Senator Palpatine - the
early days of Constantine - to "Darth Sidious" - the "dark lord of
the Sith" who wrought terror, darkness and oppression throughout
the Empire.

Darth Sidious never hesitated to kill anyone who got in his way -
even those on his dark side, just as he wanted Luke Skywalker to
kill Darth Vader - just as Constantine later executed his own son.

Later, when all seemed hopeless, and the forces for the Light - the
Jedi Knights - had been all but destroyed - out of the darkness
came Skywalker and defeated the dark side of the force, so the
Light could once again be allowed to illuminate the Empire.

Yes this is an allegory - whether the author knew it or not - but
you can be absolutely sure it is no "coincidence".

So much of the early parts of each Gospel, particularly Matthew
which used 16 pages establishing an erroneous connection to Jesus,
is simply "smoke screen" designed only to perpetuate the myth.

For the sake of completeness we should also note the fact that not
only could the "Apostles" not have written the Gospels, they could
neither have been present at Yeshua's birth to record the events
unless they were small, literate toddlers, and in any case Yeshua
did not choose them until he was around 30 years old himself, which
leaves the entire birth sequence in the Gospels without any known
author or witness whatsoever - which is not surprising because the
only witnesses were likely Joseph, their families and any helpers
in the birth process.

Was Mary a virtuous young lady - probably yes - I do not believe
anyone doubts this, and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.

Mary was probably a victim of "circumstance" and it must have been
extremely traumatic for her to say the least, as well as for Joseph
and the whole family.

Was Jesus laid down to sleep in a "manger".

Absolutely he may well have been.

But was he therefore laid to sleep in a cattle feeding trough?

Highly unlikely to say the least.

"Manger" is just another in an endless list of mis-transliterations
- deliberate or otherwise.

In fact "manger" in the language of the region at the time is a
special room in a often large home, usually associated with the upper
echelons of the society at the time.

So it is most likely that the pregnant Mary, by another man,
although not intentionally, was with her family in Nazareth with
Joseph, until the baby who was given the name of Yeshua, was born
in the "manger" room of the home where he "laid" after his birth.

Joseph and Mary may however have known of his future greatness
through the name they gave to him which was probably inspired.

"Yeshua" in fact is still a derivative of the Aramaic speaking family
name given to him of "Yehoshua".

Yehoshua in Aramaic consists of two fundamental components as
follows:

"Yeho" which invokes the Tetragrammaton - YHVH or IHVH:

Yod-Heh-Vahv-Heh

Which is a mystical Kabbalistic name of God.

In the Jewish religion, the orthodoxy never write the full name
"God" lest what they have written become corrupted, for which they
felt responsible for the consequences, so they prefer to write God
as "G-d".

Often however they get around this by using other words of the same
meaning such as "Adonai", which is the plural of "Adon" which in
turn translates to "Lord" or "Master".

"Shua" is an Aramaic word which can be considered to mean "Saviour".

So the name "Yehoshua" can be understood to mean "Saviour from
God".

This is no coincidence. It was concealed from most.

Yehoshua was indeed intended to be the "saviour" of humanity as
humanity was at that time - pagans unprepared for the coming
Transition - to prepare them 2000 years in advance.

"The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of
the age; and the reapers are the angels." Matthew 13:39

Here Jesus is advising that the agency that "sowed" the
consequences are dark thoughts, i.e. "the devil", and when the
"harvest" comes at the end of the age the "reapers" will be the
Beings of Light where only those who are ready can go.

Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into
the sea, and gathered of every kind: which, when it was filled,
they drew up on the beach; and they sat down, and gathered the good
into vessels, but the bad they cast away. So shall it be in the end
of the age: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from
among the righteous, And shall cast them into the furnace of fire:
there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Jesus saith unto
them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea,
Lord. -- Matthew 13:49 - 51

Here Jesus is saying quite clearly and unambiguously that those who
are Spiritually prepared will move onwards and inwards to greater
things within the Universe, Universal Mind of God, whereas those
who are not ready will be very upset about missing the opportunity,
and will have to be cast back in to the furnace of learning in the
physical Universe in readiness for the next opportunity. And hence
those who are ready will be separated from those who are not.

keep in Mind that 2000 years from a 25,800 year cycle is not that
long.

And Yeshua did warn his disciples that the forces of darkness may
well attempt to hijack his Divine Mission:

"As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, his disciples came to
him privately and said, "Tell us, when will this happen? What will
be the sign that you are coming again, and when will the Age come
to an end? Jesus answered them, "Be careful not to let anyone
deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ;
and shall deceive many. And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of
wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come
to pass, but the end is not yet.

For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom:
and there shall be famines, and p

For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom:
and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in
divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. Then shall
they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye
shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. And then shall
many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one
another.

And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And
because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. But
he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world
for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. When
ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by
Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let
him understand:) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the
mountains: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take
any thing out of his house: Neither let him which is in the field
return back to take his clothes And woe unto them that are with
child, and to them that give suck in those days!

But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the
sabbath day: For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not
since the beginning of the age to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be
saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there;
believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false
prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if
it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have
told you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he
is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret
chambers; believe it not.For as the lightning cometh forth from the
east, and is seen even unto the west; so shall be the coming of the
Son of man.

For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered
together. Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the
sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the
stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall
be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in
heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they
shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power
and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of
a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four
winds, from one end of heaven to the other. -- Matthew 24:3 - 31

So you see it has all come to pass beloved reader - just as Yeshua
forewarned it may.

But there is still time for the Light to prevail - and it will.

So getting back to the Nativity - what about the enigmatic "three
wise men", one of whom mysteriously changed his skin colour from
white to dark a few hundred years later as illustrated by the
surviving religiously motivated pictures?

Well this is a very interesting one lifted directly out of Mithraic
mythology/astrology especially for the occasion.

The "bright star in the East" was Sirius which is very bright at
that time of the year as observed in the region.

The three adjacent stars located in the belt of the constellation
of Orion have been known for thousands of years as the "Three Kings".

At that time of the year the astronomical positioning of these four
stars - Sirius and the "Three Kings" in the belt of the
Constellation of Orion are such that they are in what appears to be
perfect alignment intersecting Earth as observed in that region at
Dawn.

So when looking at the bright star of Sirius, we see the stars -
"Three
Kings" - "following yonder star".

But why did one of the three kings suddenly change skin colour?

Simply because - and the historical evidence full supports this -
when Christianity reached the African continent, it was deemed by
the Roman Church to be politically correct to have a "wise man"
with dark coloured skin to make the myth more acceptable to that
dark skinned continent, thus paving the way for that continent to
embrace the Roman Church because one of their own dark skinned
people was actually present at the birth of this baby "God-boy".

How about the infamous nasty King Herod who murdered all those male
babies hoping to murder the new "King of the Jews" by process of
elimination - literally?

The same Herod in fact that was implicated in Jesus "crucifixion".

Undisputed history comes to our help here by telling us that Herod
actually died around 4 BCE - 4 years before baby Yeshua's birth.

So Herod would have been dead and buried long before he could have
possibly given Yeshua a hard time, either at birth, or before his
passing - unless of course he was "resurrected" for the occasion -
anything seems possible in this "new religion" when it suited them.

Finally, why December 25 as the Yeshua's birthday?

Well there is a great irony in this as well.

The short answer is that it was the official birthday of Mithra, the
incumbent Roman Sun God, as well as of the 15 God-men that preceded
Mithra starting with Osiris.

But why that date?

How could 16 "God-men" of pagan mythology, with Yeshua, Jesus the
seventeenth, all happen to share the same "birth day".

Coincidence?

No such concept.

Quite simply the Winter Solstice when the Sun as at its lowest in
the sky takes place on December 21.

And then, 4 days later, on December 25, the Sun begins its climb
upwards in the Sky once again again, and according to mythology the
Sun, or "Son" is said to be "born" again.

So the Sun, or "Son" once again become the "Light of the World".

Yeshua did say "I Am the Light", but he did not mean in a pagan
astro-theological context.

So quite simply December 25 represents the "birth of the Sun" or
the "birth of the "Son" depending which spin you prefer.

The ultimate irony, and one in which I usually allow myself a smile
whenever I see it, is that the Roman Church reproduced this pagan
icon so precisely, they even recorded it within the Christian
"cross" on the roofs of many churches across the World.

If you see a church bearing a cross with a large circle around the
intersection point of the horizontal and vertical axis, you will
see what I mean - especially as many of these circles also have
"rays" emitting from the intersecting circle.

These crosses do not depict the "crucifixion" cross, but rather
represents the very ancient cross of the Vernal Equinox which came
from the Roman pagan deity Mithra.

The circle around the intersection represents the Sun - which is
why many of these circles have Sun rays emitting from them as well.

Not only then does this represent the "rise of the Sun/Son" but
also the "death of the Sun/Son, and the reason why the true meaning
of the Cross is this:

The Sun, "dies" upon the Cross - of the Vernal Equinox.

So these church roofs are displaying a perfect icon of the Mithraic
pagan religion.

But of course the Sun/Son is also born on the "cross" - the Vernal
Equinox as well - on December 25 - as the new "Light of the World".

But I hear you say - surely Jesus was not crucified on the cross
at Calvary until some time in April?

Well actually Yeshua was not "crucified" at all - on the wooden
cross or otherwise.

But that is another episode in the greatest drama of all time, and
one that had happened 16 times before Yeshua, Jesus appeared, so we
can visit this at a later date - mid-April seems quite appropriate.

I do hope you have enjoyed my tour of the "Nativity" which even now
reveals only a fraction of the full drama.

This newsletter was intended to be more brief than usual today, but
has become almost certainly the longest I have ever written.

I have shown you many of the keys that unlock the reality which
humanity is now facing.

Neither Source, or any other Divine Being may directly intervene in
the "destiny" of humanity.

You see humanity can ultimately only "save" ourselves.

Yeshua, Jesus came to Earth to "show us the way", but was later
hijacked by the forces of the cycle of dark Energy that became
"anti-to-the-Christ-Energy".

I cannot spell it out for you, but I hope I have provided
sufficient real knowledge to "figure it out" for yourself.

Humanity has been receiving many messages, often enigmatic,
regarding what has taken place and the way forward.

This newsletter has proven to be a harsh indictment of certain
"forces" that still dominate billions of Expressions of Source
Energy" today, at a most crucial and pivotal crossroads in the
ongoing evolution of the Human race - who our Source, God
Unconditionally Loves.

It is important to me however that you understand and trust my
motives completely which are these:

We should never, ever accept anything as truth, simply because
an ancient book says so - or your parents say so - or the Church
minister says so or whoever, or because it seems to be such a
glamorous story which you really to want to believe to be true.

Always, always take time to relax and ask yourself - just before
sleep is an excellent time - of any question you wish an answer to:

"Is this true".

Your Higher Self knows the answer Who in turn is connected to
Source, God Who knows the Ultimate Answers to All. So just ask.

You are not asking for the solution to "life the Universe and
everything", but simply "is what I am being told really true"?

Everyone recognises the truth for what it is - just allow your
inner guidance, Which will never let you down, tell you yes or no.

This equally applies to my own books, my newsletters including this
one, my website - in fact everything I write.

If my words do not "ring true" to you then you absolutely must
reject those word.

You really have no choice but to be true to your own inner guidance.

Never, ever believe anything I say simply because I said it or
wrote it - always confirm the truth within - it is there for the
asking - I assure you.

Everything I write I personally Know to be True beyond any question,
otherwise I would not, and could not write it at all.

It is very important to understand a crucial fact that no one ever
even considers - which is how the Roman Church achieved its agenda.

Religion is almost always perpetuated by one main route - Family
tradition.

You will almost always find many generations where the same
religion, be it Christianity, Islam, Judaism, LDS or whatever.

It does not matter - they are all family traditions plain and simple,
often out of respect for the beliefs of parents who are assumed to
know why they believe something to be true - mostly they do not.

They simply accept it out of "blind faith".

It is extremely rare in my experience to find a deeply religious
person, and certainly none that have come to my door in pairs, that
have ever investigated all the belief system options, and Spiritual
literature out there, and arrived at the decision - "this is the
religion for me".

You can go to any person in the street, at random, ask them why
they subscribe to their religion, and they will always say the same
thing:

"Because it is the religion of my parents".

They have never, ever made an informed decision - they let their
own parents - who they rightly respect - make the decision for them
- an their parents before them and so on.

It is an unbroken, self-perpetuating chain, that feeds the very
forces that are keeping humanity hostage during these crucial,
pivotal times.

But is it still each Expression of the Light, Source, God, choosing
this of their own Divine Freewill which must always be respected at
all times - no matter what the consequences.

Every one of us is blessed with the Freewill to choose darkness or
Light and Live with the consequences in accordance with Immutable
Universal Principles and Divine Providence.

People have been programmed about religion as they have about food,
education, and all the other areas where informed decisions should
have been made but have not - it is all family tradition that forms
the basis of the entire life of many.

Almost everyone has abrogated their Freewill to the same forces of
darkness that control almost every aspect of your experience today
- from the moment you awake, to the moment you sleep.

The "financial crisis" is just the latest in a very long line of
events originating from the forces of darkness for one main reason
- to control humanity and deny humanity from its true Source, Light
and Destiny as a Divine Being of The Light.

Until age of 7 the brain of a child is in the Alpha brainwave state.

This enables their Subconscious Mind to absorb and process vast
amounts of information. This is an evolutionary necessity due to
the need of a child of ancient times to store enough information to
enable survival very under harsh and unforgiving circumstances.

So when the parents of a young child say "we are Christian so you
are Christian", and then rush the child down to the nearest church
where a formidable looking stranger dressed in strange black and
white clothes adds to their distress even more by tipping water
over the head of the baby while uttering a few incomprehensible
sounds, which are designed for no other reason than to affirm that
they now "belong to the church" to which the child must then remain
obedient lest they incur the wrath of the vengeful "God" of that
religion.

Then the child is programmed to be "Christian" or whatever, and
most humans are still running on the same program for the rest of
their current incarnation.

They become trapped in the "Matrix" without ever knowing it.

The parents beliefs and will, as well as the water ritual, cements
their belief that they have a label attached to them which
announces in large letters - "I am Christian" and I will wear the
icon - the "crucifix" - i.e. the pagan Cross of the Vernal Equinox"
with optional Sun symbology, to let everyone know that I am now
fully programmed.

It also becomes firmly entrenched the primal survival instincts of
the child - believe in this version of "God" or you will incur the
wrath of this jealous, vengeful, capricious "God" of theology and
religion, who will make you fry in the flames of "hell" for failing
to pander to God's "will".

Due to my own powerful inner guidance, I was able to overcome this
programming when I was 8 years of age, which enabled me to embark,
with an open Mind and open connection to Source on my quest for the
Truth, which I now know was for the purpose of sharing over 40
years later to all who who would listen of their own Divine Freewill.

If I had not overcome my programming, you would not be reading this
newsletter today - plain and simple. Being Sunday I would likely be
in church singing "hymns" and repeating "prayers" to pander to the
Ego of the deity in question, while hoping that I may be deemed
worthy of my "ticket to heaven" once my Soul is finally released
from its lifelong prison.

Consider this - if I am wrong and the Roman Church is right - then
I am toast like no one has ever been toast before for my "heresy".

But be assured that I am not prepared to have a dollop of dogma
spread over me yet - or ever.

If you are a committed Christian and I have rocked your religion -
I make no apologies. I waited until after Christmas to expose the
nativity to spare you that during your seasonal festivities which
must be about the family - not baseless creed and dogma designed
only to further perpetuate a fundamental tenet of religion.

I make no apologies because I have made you think for yourself, and
perhaps even broken your programming which is a blessing to you as
well as to me.

Above all, time really is running out. The Transition really is
happening Now and it will not stop for anyone.

I have no idea precisely when or how it will conclude, because that
part of the script is still being written by humanity.

What I do know is whether it be 4 years, 8 years or 12 years or
whatever - it is very close and it most likely in your Lifetime.

This is a most blessed time to be Human on Earth - but only if you
know that and know why and configure your Life here accordingly.

You have an opportunity that is only offered once every 25,800 years.

If you "miss the boat" there will not be another boat leaving of
this size until the year 27,812 if humanity is still here by then -
which is doubtful. So you had better make sure that your Mental
bags are packed and you are ready to embark - very, very soon.

There is simply no time left to "beat about the bush" and pander to
the same forces that have held humanity back for 1800 years or so
due to what amounts to being a huge and immensely damaging con.

If the words I share do not resonate with you then that's fine - at
least you can find ones that due and make an informed choice in the
knowledge that you have made use of your own God-given freewill,
instead of perpetuating a pagan myth that started in Ancient Egypt
with Osiris, and lives on today as the "Christian religion", and in
the case of the Roman version at least, designed only to deny you
of your freedom and destiny and to disconnect you with God, Who you
may only approach through some appointed "ambassador" in black cloth.

Ask yourself this - is that religion "anti-to-the-Christ" by denying
you the opportunity to grow closer to God while perpetuating only
fear and guilt through the false doctrines of "hell" and "sin", or
are they Pro-Christ in bringing you closer to God, Freedom of
Choice, Freedom of Expression, and Freedom to Live and to Love in
accordance with your own God-given Divine Freewill?

These are very serious questions that you must ask of yourself.

But we should, in the interests of completeness, acknowledge the
fact that Jesus - Yeshua - did exist around that era, and was a
very great teacher who came here to help prepare humanity for the
end of this current age.

He said himself: "lo I will be with you until the end of the age".

The Bible uses the word "world" but that is a deliberate
mistranslation of the Greek word "Aeon" which really means "Age".

As we have often discussed here in this newsletter, there remains
many very powerful teachings of Yeshua that were hidden from most
people, the literal words becoming the basis of theology of the
church.

They were hidden from the dark forces for a reason. Had the dark
forces got hold of them, they would have surely turned them against
humanity, and who knows what the consequences would be.

Source in Source's Infinite Wisdom, Always provides protection
against the misuse of Divine Universal Principle of the Light.

So we should never rise up against any religion or any other source
of information as a matter of principle, discarding any truth and
valuable lessons with the untruths, dogmas and doctrines, thereby
"throwing the baby out with the bath water".

We should always take that new knowledge that we know to be true,
that it might help us evolve a little or even a lot further, and
simply discard the rest gracefully in to the bin of all other
useless "knowledge" out there that disguises itself as "truth".

Jesus had the benefit of 30 years of teachings by the Essenes, as
well as a very high level connection with Source, so the real Jesus
has much to offer us even now - if we can extract his true
teachings from the mire of creed, dogma and indoctrination.

I am currently researching original Aramaic sources of both the words
of Jesus, and of the Essenes - if we have that we have the true,
undiluted, unpolluted source of Jesus, and that would be really
something. Ancient Aramaic texts hold many valuable keys to unlock
the teachings of Jesus and other great teachers of the era.

Once we "find" the true Jesus, the false doctrines that later
emerged in his name, false doctrines are "anti-to-the-Christ, the
Light, Unconditional Love", the entities that fed on these false
doctrines must die, and the true Yeshua can emerge in all his
Divine glory in Love, Light and through the same Christ Energy that
flows through us all.

And this time of the year should always remain a season of Love,
Giving and Being - which can be carried through to every day of the
year.

Until your next newsletter I wish you every happiness for your new
year festivities - make it a celebration of Life - and a Healthy,
Joyful and Abundant week.

In Love, Light and Truth,

Adrian.

Hi,

Does Adrian want us to throw out every level of truth except his take on truth that we are all one/we are all God?  

A truth that is important can be realized at many levels, much as the Aramaic language itself apparently was.  It is not necessary to choose one level and dismiss the rest, for the truth carries throughout.  Each of us may find a level or two that we are more comfortable with and need reminders or instruction for the others, but Truth is still truth, regardless of any single limited viewpoint.

I'm not saying that I understand every event in the Gospels, but I do think the Nativity is a beautiful story/event/ beginning of a new age then. Why "throw out the baby with the bath water"?

Bets

I guess the point is that you cannot believe everything you read, regardless of the source, until you personally secure the truth through spiritual guidance of some kind and/or experience.  

He actually states that one should not "throw out the baby with the bath water," but should retain all truth, even if it is hidden in a pile of untruth.  Adrian actually supports a great deal of what is written in the bible, especially related to Jesus.

It is a good story, the Nativity, but apparently that's all it is.  There is nothing wrong with revealing an untruth.  In this case, either the Nativity happened the way they said it did, or it didn't.  My guess is that it didn't, but I figured this out long before I read this article.  The idea is to think for yourself and find your own truths.

http://www.candlegrove.com/solstice.html

The link above will explain the winter solstice. Before there was christianity, there was paganism. Paganism lasted longer than 2,000 years. The original winter celebration was to ward away the darkness and ask the daylight to come back.  (I have no idea what the Eskomos did in upper North America, Greenland, Iceland and upper Russia when they had months at a time in darkness.)  Anyhow, if you look at most of the Christian holidays, they coincied with the pagan traditions, falling close to the 1/4 yearly events; spring, summer, autumn and winter.

When I was a kid-- the "Virgin conception" was explained thusly: the spirit of an angel of God passed through Mary's physical leaving behind the spiritual seed of God in her womb. The virgin birth happened when these same spirits of angels of God reached into Mary's womb and pulled the child out, henceforth keeping her a virgin.

So, who actually has the pagan mind? The Catholic church whose men wanted to keep its followers under controll with "mysteries" of the virgin conception and birth?  Or the pagans who believed that by scrafice and worship they could bring back the summer light??

cat

A few years ago I asked Adrian how he (she?) comes up with his information, and he said some of it is based upon experience, some of it is based upon what he read. Therefore, he's like the rest of us.

How much of the above is true, how much is false? I don't know. I figure the most important thing is for each of us to find the Christ spirit that abides within us.  If the above helps a person get over restrictive viewpoints of Christ, certainly this is a good thing. Divine truth shouldn't feel stifling. It should enable you to experience a really nice feeling of peace within your heart.

I'd like to add, when it comes to the virgin birth thing, I haven't received information one way or the other.  I don't believe it is necessary for a birth to take place in such a way. Nothing wrong with getting pregnant in the usual way.

I feel differently about the crucifixion, because according to the messages I received, Jesus was crucified. Therefore, if somebody states differently, I wonder why.  

Regarding the viewpoint that Jesus died for our sins,  perhaps he opened up a spiritual gateway that wasn't opened up by a human being before. Once one person reaches this level, it becomes easier for other people to do the same.  We're all connected. I doubt that such an occurence would be dependent upon Jesus' body being crucified.

A lot of people have considered Jesus' crucifixion to be an important event. I can't judge what's important for them. Different people get inspired in different ways. Going by my experiences lower realms exist. If some people avoided a lower realm partly because they believed in Jesus, I figure this is a good thing. If the crucifixion is a part of the reason they feel good about Jesus, this is for them to decide, not me.  I figure the divine powers that be realize that people get inspired in various ways. They might've realized that many people will respond to a historical event that stands out. How have things worked out?

Recoverer said
"  perhaps he opened up a spiritual gateway that wasn't opened up by a human being before."

This is one of those Truth-things that resonates at all sorts of levels at once!  I can't explain it, I just know it when i hear it.  
This one  has to do with spirit evolving on all levels -- events in time, heart-based, mental concepts, etc.

These multi-level truths keep coming up on this site, thanks to all of you, more frequently than in any reading I can find beyond spiritual classics !  
Today it's recoverer's, next it'll maybe be Dude, then Juditha, etc etc!
Thanks you All!

Bets

Betson:

Thank you for sharing your confirmation. I can't explain it, but I like that you wrote "I can't explain it." :)



betson wrote on Dec 29^th, 2008 at 5:03pm:

Recoverer said "  perhaps he opened up a spiritual gateway that wasn't opened up by a human being before." This is one of those Truth-things that resonates at all sorts of levels at once!  I can't explain it, I just know it when i hear it.   This one  has to do with spirit evolving on all levels -- events in time, heart-based, mental concepts, etc. These multi-level truths keep coming up on this site, thanks to all of you, more frequently than in any reading I can find beyond spiritual classics !   Today it's recoverer's, next it'll maybe be Dude, then Juditha, etc etc! Thanks you All! Bets

I agree, Recoverer.  What's important is not so much what you believe, but rather in what manner your beliefs influence your thoughts and emotions.  In other words, it makes no difference whether you are Christian, Buddist, or Hindu, as long as your beliefs are a positive influence in your life.  Regarding this particular subject, it makes little difference whether or not you believe in the nativity, or the crucifixion.  If these concepts/theories/histories allow you to better live according to love and your innermost being, then that is what's important.  If they have little or no meaning to you, that is also fine.  No one should be forced to believe anything.  However, influencing someone to change false, limiting beliefs feels to be a noble and altruistic deed.

Another perspective:

TEXT OF READING 5749-15

This Psychic Reading given by Edgar Cayce at the office of the Association, Arctic Crescent, Virginia Beach, Va., this 22nd day of June, 1941, at the Tenth Annual Congress of the Ass''n for Research & Enlightenment, Inc.

P R E S E N T

Edgar Cayce; Gertrude Cayce, Conductor; Gladys Davis, Steno. Gladys & Charles Dillman, Fannie L. & J. Floyd Leonard, Malcolm Allen, Florence Edmonds, Minnie & C. A. Barrett, Beatrice & Richmond Seay, Gladys Hardin, Frances Y. Morrow, Hannah & Noah Miller, Mignon Helms, Shea Hurley, Sallie Jones, Alberta Burmeister, Henrietta McClelland, Kathryn Patterson, Willie L. & Katherine McAllister, Sally Taylor, Marion Wolfe, Marsden Godfrey, Helen Storey, Esther Wynne, Jane Williams, Ruth & Jeanne LeNoir, Burt Davis, Mae Verhoeven, Riley Simmons, Doris House, Ethel & Edgar Parry, Rosa & Joshua Manning, Ruth Denney, Lucille, David, S. David & Richard Kahn, Thomas Sugrue, Hugh Lynn Cayce and others.

R E A D I N G

Time of Reading 3:40 to 4:35 P. M. Eastern Standard Time.

1. GC: You will have before you the enquiring mind of the entity Thomas Sugrue, present in this room, who seeks a continuation of information given on the life of the Master and its history in the material world, given in Readings of June 27, 1937 [5749-7 and 5749-8]. Because of the purpose for which this information is to be used, he asks at this time for a description of a literary nature of certain events in the life of the Master which are known to us in outline but not in detail. You will give these as presented, - first the birth of the Master at Bethlehem beginning with the arrival of Mary and Joseph at the Inn. You will include such details as weather, time, conversation with Inn Keeper, number of people at the Inn, types they represented, recreations and occupations engaged in during the evening, what was being eaten and drunk, whether the guests knew the Child was being born, actual time of birth, etc.

2. EC: Yes, we have the information that has been indicated respecting some of the events surrounding the birth of Jesus, the son of Mary, in Bethlehem of Judea.

3. The purposes are well known, for which the journey was made in the period. The activities of Joseph are well known. The variation or difference in their ages is not so oft dealt upon. Neither is there much indicated in sacred or profane history as to the preparation of the mother for that channel through which immaculate conception might take place. And this, the immaculate conception, is a stumblingstone to many worldly-wise.

4. The arrival was in the evening, - not as counted from the Roman time, nor that declared to Moses by God when the second passover was to be kept, nor that same time which was in common usage even in that land, but what would NOW represent January sixth.

5. The weather was cool, and there were crowds on the way. For, it was only a sabbath day's journey from Jerusalem. There were great crowds of people on the way from the hills of Judea.

6. The people were active in the occupations of the varied natures in that unusual land. Some were carpenters, - as those of the house of Joseph, who had been delayed, even on the journey, by the condition of the Mother. Some in the group were helpers to Joseph, - carpenters' helpers. Then there were shepherds, husbandmen, and the varied groups that had their small surroundings as necessitated by the conditions of the fields about Nazareth.

7. In the evening then, or at twilight, Joseph approached the Inn, that was filled with those who had also journeyed there on their way to be polled for the tax as imposed by the Romans upon the people of the land. For, those had been sent out who were to judge the abilities of the varied groups to be taxed. And each individual was required by the Roman law to be polled in the city of his birth.

8. Both Joseph and Mary were members of the sect called the Essenes; and thus they were questioned by those not only in the political but in the religious authority in the cities.

9. Then there was the answer by the inn keeper, "No room in the inn," especially for such an occasion. Laughter and jeers followed, at the sight of the elderly man with the beautiful girl, his wife, heavy with child.

10. Disappointments were written upon not only the face of Joseph but the inn keeper's daughter, as well as those of certain groups about the inn. For, many saw the possibilities of an unusual story that might be gained if the birth were to take place in the inn. Also there was consternation outside, among those who had heard that Joseph and Mary had arrived and were not given a room. They began to seek some place, some shelter.

11. For, remember, many of those - too - were of that questioned group; who had heard of that girl, that lovely wife of Joseph who had been chosen by the angels on the stair; who had heard of what had taken place in the hills where Elizabeth had gone, when there was the visit from the cousin - and as to those things which had also come to pass in her experience. Such stories were whispered from one to another.

12. Thus many joined in the search for some place. Necessity demanded that some place be sought - quickly. Then it was found, under the hill, in the stable - above which the shepherds were gathering their flocks into the fold.

13. There the Savior, the Child was born; who, through the will and the life manifested, became the Savior of the world - that channel through which those of old had been told that the promise would be fulfilled that was made to EVE; the arising again of another like unto Moses; and as given to David, the promise was not to depart from that channel. But lower and lower man's concept of needs had fallen.

14. Then, - when hope seemed gone, - the herald angels sang. The star appeared, that made the wonderment to the shepherds, that caused the awe and consternation to all of those about the Inn; some making fun, some smitten with conviction that those unkind things said must needs be readjusted in their relationships to things coming to pass.

15. All were in awe as the brightness of His star appeared and shone, as the music of the spheres brought that joyful choir, "PEACE ON EARTH! GOOD WILL TO MEN OF GOOD FAITH."

16. ALL felt the vibrations and saw a great light, - not only the shepherds above that stable but those in the Inn as well.

17. To be sure, those conditions were later to be dispelled by the doubters, who told the people that they had been overcome with wine or what not.

18. Just as the midnight hour came, there was the birth of the Master.

19. The daughter of the inn keeper was soon upon the scene, as was the mother of the daughter, and the shepherds that answered the cry - and had gone to see what was come to pass.

20. Those were the manners, and the ones present soon afterwards. For, through the period of purification the Mother remained there, not deeming it best to leave, though all forms of assistance were offered; not leaving until there was the circumcision and the presenting in the temple to the magi, to Anna and to Simeon.

21. Such were the surroundings at the period of the birth of Jesus.

22. (Q) The first recorded miracle at the wedding in Cana of Galilee when the Master changed water into wine. The entity desires again such details as weather, names of people in wedding, food and drink, games and dances, etc.
(A) A great deal of that leading to the experience, to be sure, is being skipped over. For, that came about soon after the return of the Master from the Jordan, and his dwelling by the sea, his conversation with Peter - after Andrew had told Peter of the happenings at the Jordan; and there was the wedding in Cana of Galilee.

The girl was a relative of those close to the Mother of Jesus, who prepared the wedding feast - as was the custom in that period, and is yet among those of the Jewish faith who adhere to the traditions as well as custom of those people chosen as the channel because of their purpose with God.

The girl to be wed was a daughter of the cousin of Mary, a daughter of a younger sister of Elizabeth, whose name was also Mary. And she was the one spoken of as "the other Mary," and not as some have supposed. [See 2946-3 on 6/18/43 verifying this.]

The customs required that there be a feast, which was composed of the roasted lamb with the herbs, the breads that had been prepared in the special ways as were the custom and tradition of those who followed close to the faith in Moses' law, Moses' custom, Moses' ordinances.

The families of Mary were present, as well as those of the groom.

The groom, in the name Roael, was among the sons of Zebedee; being an elder brother of James and John who later became the close friends and the closer followers of Jesus.

The Master, returning with those who were hangers-on, naturally sought to speak with His mother. Learning of this happening He, too, with the followers, were bid to remain at the feast.

Much wine also was part of the custom. The day was what ye would call June third. There were plenty of flowers and things of the field, yet only a part of those things needed. For, the custom called for more of the meats prepared with certain herbs, and wines.

The day had been fine; the evening was fair; the moon was full. This then brought the activities with the imbibing more and more of wine, more hilarity, and the dance - which was in the form of the circles that were a part of the customs, not only of that land then but that are in your own land now and then being revived.

With those activities, as indicated, the wine ran low. Remember, the sons of Zebedee were among those of the upper class, as would be termed; not the poorer ones. Thence the reason why Mary served or prepared for her relative the feast.

From those happenings that were a portion of her experience upon their return from Egypt, - as to how the increase had come in the food when they had been turned aside as they journeyed back towards the Promised Land, - Mary felt, knew, was convinced within herself that here again there might be such an experience, with her son returning as a man starting upon his mission. For, what was the pronouncement to the mother when Gabriel spoke to her? What was the happening with Elizabeth when the mother spoke to her?

This might be called a first period of test. For, had He not just ten days ago sent Satan away, and received ministry from the angels? This had come to be known as hearsay. Hence the natural questioning of the mother-love for the purposes; this son - strange in many ways had chosen, by the dwelling in the wilderness for the forty days, and then the returning to the lowly people, the fishermen, about this country. It brought on the questioning by the mother.

23. We are through for the present."

A rather interesting, more general reading:

"TEXT OF READING 5749-14

This Psychic Reading given by Edgar Cayce at the office of the Association, Arctic Crescent, Virginia Beach, Va., this 14th day of May, 1941, in accordance with request made by the self - Mr. Thomas Sugrue, Active Member of the Ass''n for Research & Enlightenment, Inc.

P R E S E N T

Edgar Cayce; Hugh Lynn Cayce, Conductor; Gladys Davis, Steno. Thomas Sugrue and Gertrude Cayce.

R E A D I N G

Time of Reading 4:10 to 4:35 P. M. Eastern Standard Time.

1. HLC: You will have before you the enquiring mind of the entity, Thomas Sugrue, present in this room, and certain of the problems which confront him in composing the manuscript of THERE IS A RIVER.

The entity is now ready to describe the philosophical concepts which have been given through this source, and wishes to parallel and align them with known religious tenets, especially those of Christian theology.

The entity does not wish to set forth a system of thought, nor imply that all questions of a philosophical nature can be answered through this source - the limitations of the finite mind prevent this.

But the entity wishes to answer those questions which will naturally arise in the mind of the reader, and many of the questions which are being asked by all people in the world today.

Therefore the entity presents certain problems and questions, which you will answer as befits the entity's understanding and the task of interpretation before him.

2. EC: Yes, we have the enquiring mind, Thomas Sugrue, and those problems, those questions that arise in the mind of the entity at this period. Ready for questions.

3. (Q) The first problem concerns the reason for creation. Should this be given as God's desire to experience Himself, God's desire for companionship, God's desire for expression, or in some other way?
(A) God's desire for companionship and expression.

4. (Q) The second problem concerns that which is variously called evil, darkness, negation, sin. Should it be said that this condition existed as a necessary element of creation, and the soul, given free will, found itself with the power to indulge in it, or lose itself in it? Or should it be said that this is a condition created by the activity of the soul itself? Should it be described, in either case, as a state of consciousness, a gradual lack of awareness of self and self's relation to God?
(A) It is the free will and its losing itself in its relationship to God.

5. (Q) The third problem has to do with the fall of man. Should this be described as something which was inevitable in the destiny of souls, or something which God did not desire, but which He did not prevent once He had given free will? The problem here is to reconcile the omniscience of God and His knowledge of all things with the free will of the soul and the soul's fall from grace.
(A) He did not prevent, once having given free will. For, He made the individual entities or souls in the beginning. For, the beginnings of sin, of course, were in seeking expression of themselves outside of the plan or the way in which God had expressed same. Thus it was the individual, see?

Having given free will, then, - though having the foreknowledge, though being omnipotent and omnipresent, - it is only when the soul that is a portion of God CHOOSES that God knows the end thereof.

6. (Q) The fourth problem concerns man's tenancy on earth. Was it originally intended that souls remain out of earthly forms, and were the races originated as a necessity resulting from error?
(A) The earth and its manifestations were only the expression of God and not necessarily as a place of tenancy for the souls of men, until man was created - to meet the needs of existing conditions.

7. (Q) The fifth problem concerns an explanation of the Life Readings. From a study of these it seems that there is a trend downward, from early incarnations, toward greater earthliness and less mentality. Then there is a swing upward, accompanied by suffering, patience, and understanding. Is this the normal pattern, which results in virtue and oneness with God obtained by free will and mind?
(A) This is correct. It is the pattern as it is set in Him.

8. (Q) The sixth problem concerns interplanetary and inter-system dwelling, between earthly lives. It was given through this source that the entity Edgar Cayce, after the experience as Uhjltd, went to the system of Arcturus, and then returned to earth. Does this indicate a usual or an unusual step in soul evolution?
(A) As indicated, or as has been indicated in other sources besides this as respecting this very problem, - Arcturus is that which may be called the center of this universe, through which individuals pass and at which period there comes the choice of the individual as to whether it is to return to complete there - that is, in this planetary system, our sun, the earth sun and its planetary system - or to pass on to others. This was an unusual step, and yet a usual one.

9. (Q) The seventh problem concerns implications from the sixth problem. Is it necessary to finish the solar system cycle before going to other systems?
(A) Necessary to finish the solar cycle.

10. (Q) Can oneness be attained - or the finish of evolution reached - on any system, or must it be in a particular one?
(A) Depending upon what system the entity has entered, to be sure. It may be completed in any of the many systems.

11. (Q) Must the solar cycle be finished on earth, or can it be completed on another planet, or does each planet have a cycle of its own which must be finished?
(A) If it is begun on the earth it must be finished on the earth. The solar system of which the earth is a part is only a portion of the whole. For, as indicated in the number of planets about the earth, they are of one and the same - and they are relative one to another. It is the cycle of the whole system that is finished, see?

12. (Q) The eighth problem concerns the pattern made by parents at conception. Should it be said that this pattern attracts a certain soul because it approximates conditions which that soul wishes to work with?
(A) It approximates conditions. It does not set. For, the individual entity or soul, given the opportunity, has its own free will to work in or out of those problems as presented by that very union. Yet the very union, of course, attracts or brings a channel or an opportunity for the expression of an individual entity.

13. (Q) Does the incoming soul take on of necessity some of the parents' karma?
(A) Because of its relative relationship to same, yes. Otherwise, no.

14. (Q) Does the soul itself have an earthly pattern which fits back into the one created by the parents?
(A) Just as indicated, it is relative - as one related to another; and because of the union of activities they are brought in the pattern. For in such there is the explanation of universal or divine laws, which are ever one and the same; as indicated in the expression that God moved within Himself and then He didn't change, though did bring to Himself that of His own being made crucified even in the flesh.

15. (Q) Are there several patterns which a soul might take on, depending on what phase of development it wished to work upon - i.e., could a soul choose to be one of several personalities, any of which would fit its individuality?
(A) Correct.

16. (Q) Is the average fulfillment of the soul's expectation more or less than fifty percent?
(A) It's a continuous advancement, so it is more than fifty percent.

17. (Q) Are hereditary, environment and will equal factors in aiding or retarding the entity's development?
(A) Will is the greater factor, for it may overcome any or all of the others; provided that will is made one with the pattern, see? For, no influence of heredity, environment or what not, surpasses the will; else why would there have been that pattern shown in which the individual soul, no matter how far astray it may have gone, may enter with Him into the holy of holies?

18. (Q) The ninth problem concerns the proper symbols, or similes, for the Master, the Christ. Should Jesus be described as the soul who first went through the cycle of earthly lives to attain perfection, including perfection in the planetary lives also?
(A) He should be. This is as the man, see?

19. (Q) Should this be described as a voluntary mission One Who was already perfected and returned to God, having accomplished His Oneness in other planes and systems?
(A) Correct.

20. (Q) Should the Christ-Consciousness be described as the awareness within each soul, imprinted in pattern on the mind and waiting to be awakened by the will, of the soul's oneness with God?
(A) Correct. That's the idea exactly!

21. (Q) Please list the names of the incarnations of the Christ, and of Jesus, indicating where the development of the man Jesus began.
(A) First, in the beginning, of course; and then as Enoch, Melchizedek, in the perfection. Then in the earth of Joseph, Joshua, Jeshua, Jesus.

22. (Q) The tenth problem concerns the factors of soul evolution. Should mind, the builder, be described as the last development because it should not unfold until it has a firm foundation of emotional virtues?
(A) This might be answered Yes and No, both. But if it is presented in that there is kept, willfully, see, that desire to be in the at-onement, then it is necessary for that attainment before it recognizes mind as the way.

23. (Q) The eleventh problem concerns a parallel with Christianity. Is Gnosticism the closest type of Christianity to that which is given through this source?
(A) This is a parallel, and was the commonly accepted one until there began to be set rules in which there were the attempts to take short cuts. And there are none in Christianity!

24. (Q) What action of the early church, or council, can be mentioned as that which ruled reincarnation from Christian theology?
(A) Just as indicated, - the attempts of individuals to accept or take advantage of, because of this knowledge, see?

25. (Q) Do souls become entangled in other systems as they did in this system?
(A) In other systems that represent the same as the earth does in this system, yes.

26. (Q) Is there any other advice which may be given to this entity at this time in the preparation of these chapters?
(A) Hold fast to that ideal, and using Him ever as the Ideal. And hold up that NECESSITY for each to meet the same problems. And DO NOT attempt to shed or to surpass or go around the Cross. THIS is that upon which each and every soul MUST look and know it is to be borne in self WITH Him.

27. We are through for the present.

Copy to Thomas Sugrue
" " Ass'n file

 Interestingly, this unusual source once referenced that not only was Yeshua "virgin born", but that there have been other "virgin births" in this world, though it did not list them, besides Yeshua's own mother, Miriam who also was said to have been born of a woman who did not sleep with a man to become pregnant.  

  Actually, there seemed to be two different kinds of virgin births as outlined in the readings.   One that is apparently ascribed to a seeming "past" life of Cayce himself as "Ra Tah", was rather from E.T. influence.  Course the Readings don't outright say this, but rather reference to the "Gods of the Caspian mountains" and their influence in Ra Tah's birth.  Perhaps because of his extra E.T. genetics, or their manipulation of his genes, he was born rather unusual, and was the first true White/Caucasian man in the Earth.   Interestingly enough, some genetic scientists from Denmark through their genetic research now believe that the first true white folks with blue eyes originated some 9,000 years ago or so (don't remember their exact number as this is from memory and something read awhile ago).   This is fairly close to the timeline of Ra Tah as given by the source of these readings.

 In other readings, Cayce's source seems to refer to E.T.'s and their influences.  One Life Reading for a woman who was a Mayan, referenced to "visitors from other worlds" in flying ships visiting the Earth at that period.  

 The other type of "virgin birth", seems to be different, a wholly spiritual/Spirit occurrence, such as Cayce seems to ascribe to Yeshua and his mother.   His source seemed to indicate that this was possible because of the degree of spiritual developement of both parties, AND because they were "Twin Souls" from the beginning of their Earth involvement.  
In another reading, it said that eventually humanity would spiritually evolve to the point that such births without pre-copulation would become more common in this world.  

 I do agree with Albert that belief in a virgin birth is not all that important.  However, i find these readings extremely interesting.   I find it interesting that a number of seeming "revelatory" info found in Bruce Moen's work, is actually found much earlier in Cayce's work, though worded different.   Such as the concept of a true Soul personality death in the "afterlife".  

 Perhaps that is because truth is ultimately universal in nature, and more spiritually/PUL attuned sources tap into deeper, more accurate, broad, and universal info?

More about "Christmas" and from a Life Reading of a woman who has another self in that space/time as a woman who worked for the Inn that Miriam and Yosef were turned away from.  

"10. Yet as the entity waited, expectant, there was the general rabble; and there were the discussions of those that journeyed to Jerusalem for the meetings, as well as to the centers for their taxing-registration - as ye would term in the present.

11. The entity was comely in person and was sought by one that would today be called a registrar, as companion; yet rejected him - though the entity has met him in this present experience; and the association has meant much, and much disturbance too.

12. Then the entity aided, so that all was in readiness, when in the evening - just before the sun in all its glory of the Palestine hills gave forth almost into the voice of nature, proclaiming the heralding of a new hope, a new birth to the earth, and the glorifying of man's hope in God - the spectre of His Star in the evening sky brought awe and wonder to all that beheld.

13. And the entity, being anxious, gazed with wondering awe at that UNUSUAL experience to all, and wept with JOY of those unfoldments within self, of the emotions that made for the expectancy of glory surpassing what had been told of all the glories of her peoples in the days of old.

14. There the entity felt what may be very close akin to the experiences in self in the present - that a new light, a new vision, a new experience was BEING BORN in every atom of its being.

15. Then when it was known to the entity that the den, the cave, the stable had been occupied - Oh, the rush, Oh, the desire to be off to see what that experience might be, held the very being of the entity!

16. And as soon as its duties were cleared about the home, as the space was very near, the entity started. But as the entity walked into the open upon that Eve, the brightness of His Star came nearer and nearer. And the entity heard, even as the Shepherds, "PEACE on earth, GOOD WILL to men."

17. There came again that awe, that feeling of a new creation, of a new experience, as the entity among those - only with the closer attendant of the Mother - hastened; while all the rabble, all the jeers of a world were stopped!

18. As it hastened to the quarters where the Mother lay, in all that awe of a new experience, and the light as from His Star filled the place, the entity then first beheld the BABE. That was the crowning experience, until the plea that she - too - might hold that glorious child in her arms also!"....  
Reading 1152-3

from another reading:

"32. (Q) Do we celebrate Christmas at approximately the right time?
(A) Not a great variation, for there having been the many changes in the accounting of time, or accounting for the periods from the various times when time is counted - not far wrong - twenty-fourth, twenty-fifth of December, as ye have your time now."
Reading 5749-8

More on immaculate conception and the virgin birth:

"(The immaculate conception has) much more to do with the mental and spiritual aspects than the physical; though the body should be near to perfect coordination physically for such to be consummated in a body, and high mental and spiritual aspirations, desires, and purposes."
Reading 2072-3


"23. (Q) Explain the immaculate conception.
(A) As flesh is the activity of the mental being (or the spiritual self and mental being) pushing itself into matter, and as spirit - as He gave - is neither male nor female, they are then both - or one.

And when man had reached that period of the full separation from Creative Forces in the spirit, then flesh as man knows it today became in material plane a reality.

Then, the immaculate conception is the physical and mental so attuned to spirit as to be quickened by same.

Hence the spirit, the soul of the Master then was brought into being through the accord of the Mother in materiality that ye know in the earth as conception...

 27. (Q) Does the immaculate conception, as explained, concern the coming of Mary to Anne, or Jesus to Mary?
(A) Of Jesus to Mary.

28. (Q) Was Mary immaculately conceived?
(A) Mary was immaculately conceived. [See 2067-11, Par. 9-A.]..."
Reading 5749-7


"13. (Q) Is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that Mary was without original sin from the moment of her conception in the womb of Ann, correct?
(A) It would be correct in ANY case. Correct more in this. For, as for the material teachings of that just referred to, you see: In the beginning Mary was the twin-soul of the Master in the entrance into the earth!...

See, there was no belief in the fact that Ann proclaimed that the child was without father. It's like many proclaiming today that the Master was immaculately conceived; they say "Impossible!" They say that it isn't in compliance with the natural law. It IS a natural law, as has been indicated by the projection of mind into matter and thus making of itself a separation to become encased in same - as man did.

Then, that there has been an encasement was a beginning. Then there must be an end when this must be or may be broken; and this began at that particular period. Not the only - this particular period with Ann and then the Master AS the son; but the ONLY begotten of the Father in the flesh AS a son OF an immaculately conceived daughter! [See 5749-8, Par. R1.]

15. (Q) Neither Mary nor Jesus, then, had a human father?
(A) Neither Mary nor Jesus had a human father. They were one SOUL so far as the earth is concerned; because [else] she would not be incarnated in flesh, you see. [See 2067-11, Par. 9-A.]"
Reading 5749-8


"55. (Q) Please give that information concerning immaculate conception that can be given for me.
(A) As the spirit was made manifest in the body purified by consecration of purpose in the lives manifested in the earth, so might the spirit - with the brooding of the body itself - bring to the organs of flesh a body through which the spirit may itself manifest in the earth.

Remember those forms which have been given. First, He was created - brought into being from all that there was in the earth, as an encasement for the soul of an entity, a part of the Creator; knowing separation in death. Then He was made manifest in birth through the union of channels growing out of that thought of the Creator made manifest, but so expressed, so manifested as Enoch as to merit the escaping of death - which had been the result as the law of disobedience. He was made manifest in Melchizedek by desire alone, not knowing body, not knowing mind, - save its own; brought into being in materialization as of itself; passing from materialization in the same manner. Then there was perfected that period again in BODY when the other soul or portion of self was made manifest by the consecration of the mother; meeting then self by that same quickening power as had been made manifest in the beginning - or at first.

Hence the cycle. Hence the circle. Hence the emblem of same becomes as the channel through which such takes its form, its expression, its symbol."
Reading 2072-4


This next one is taken from the book called, "The Edgar Cayce Companion"  I looked for the excerpt in the actual readings and can't find it, so i believe the author made a mistake when he listed it as reading 1904-2, but i'm sure the text for the excerpt does exist somewhere in the readings.

 "Mary had fulfilled all things that God had required of her and later fulfilled her physical karma by bearing three other children by Man.  In bringing perfection by balancing the spiritual, mental and physical in her own activities she made it possible for all women to have that opportunity..."
 supposedly reading 1904-2

 "Souls will evolve into the manner to be able to bring into the world souls, even as Mary did.
 And these may come as the Souls of men and women become more and more aware that these channels, these temples of the body are indeed the temple of the living God and may be used for those communications with God, the Father of souls of men."
excerpted from reading 1158-5

Wow, thank you for sharing that article, Dude. There was certainly some great stuff in there. I feel like something is coming and I don't know exactly when but I buy the precession of the earth's axis argument and the 26000 year cycle. But sometimes I feel kind of foolish about it too. It seems there was always a group of people believing that a massive change was on the way...but then when I think about it those massive changes have occurred lots of times. Perhaps the change will be a new way of thinking about peace and harmony here and a better understanding of healing energies and just energy in general. How can I get those newsletters? I'm not sure about every word but much of it was refreshing to me. Thanks again.

Yours,
Beau

I, too have read several accounts from "seers" who discount the immaculte conception and attribuite it to Extra Terrestials. As in Whitney Strieber's books "Communion" and "Transformation" and in Irish lure: Extra Terrestials came to the planet and instilled their seed into primitive man in order to obtain a "likeness" to themselves who would be adaptable to the planets eco system. Edgar Caycee also stated the the immiculate conception was instilled this way (embro synthesis). This is supposidly how major brilliant minds like Einstein, Michaelangelo, Newton all came to be.

Sometime it's not good enough just to know things. Sometimes you just have to believe!!!  :P ;D

Interesting how so much of the channeled material wants to discredit the Biblical account of Jesus' birth and death.......

As I recall Seth also claimed Jesus was never crucified.

I would only ask that those who readily accept this material consider what possible agenda(s) are behind it.

And as always, the bottom line question should be how does any of it affect how we live our day to day lives?

R

Beau

Its a very good newsletter.. go to Astralpulse.com.  You can subscribe from there.

Ident

That is a very interesting idea... perhaps Mary was impregnated by ETs!  That would explain how she retained her virginity.

Rondele

The idea behind discrediting false biblical material is basically to allow people to see what is truth and what is not.  Those who follow the bible down to the last word may very well be enclosed in limiting belief systems resulting from that blind faith.  So revealing the untruths of the bible can potentially expand people's perspectives and help them see that they need to search for truth that is not offered in the bible.  

I Am Dude wrote on Jan 4^th, 2009 at 3:40pm:

Rondele The idea behind discrediting false biblical material is basically to allow people to see what is truth and what is not.  Those who follow the bible down to the last word may very well be enclosed in limiting belief systems resulting from that blind faith.  So revealing the untruths of the bible can potentially expand people's perspectives and help them see that they need to search for truth that is not offered in the bible.

 Hi Dude,

 I have studied the various scientific research on the Shroud of Turin deeply and from various angles.  All evidence taken as a whole points to it being the burial cloth of Yeshua.  

 If true, like I have every reason to believe it is, then who is doling out false biblical information, you and Seth, or the Bible account?   The Shroud image shows a CRUCIFIED man, all anatomically correct and all aligned with the synthesized gospel story of his death by crucifixion.  One of the only ancient, full bodied depictions of Christ which show him crucified through the wrists and not the hands, btw as it must have actually been.

 Furthermore, two psychic, channeled sources which are a lot more INDEPENDENTLY verified in various ways and readily checkable in a factual sense, both claim that Yeshua was crucified and then resurrected.   One is Rosiland McKnight's guidance and her extensive (free and non fame seeking) work with Robert Monroe, and the other Edgar Cayce and his simply huge and profound work.  

   Will you continue to promote false biblical info even though the truth is readily available?   Again, we have 4 main sources which corroborate.   Historical documents written by people who knew Yeshua and saw his life with those who knew the former people, two much more credible psychic sources, and the Shroud of Turin--the ONLY artifact of its like ever found and oh yeah, just so happens to point to being the Shroud of Jesus.  

 You pride yourself on being logical, objective, reasoning things out for yourself,, and having an open mind?  The proof is in the pudding, instead you consistently defend a source in which you can't specifically back up any verifications yourself, other to say that another person claims they were clairvoyantly tested and found to have verifications.  

 Perhaps you have no respect for Edgar Cayce's work, perhaps you have no respect for the detailed, holistic scientific research done on the Turin Shroud, perhaps you have no respect for multiple historical accounts, but I would at least think you have respect for a source that shaped The Monroe Institute and the Gateway Voyage program itself, a source that Robert Monroe constantly and eagerly looked forward to every week listening too...

 So much for "openmindedness" eh...

Justin

You have me all wrong my man.

I wasn't referring to the crucifixion when I mentioned false biblical material, I was referring to the nativity story, and also some other rather silly stories and lessons which can be found throughout the bible which are not in tune with PUL.  

As for the crucifixion, I do not know what happened, but I believe there is a good chance it did occur.  I am actually reading Cosmic Journeys by McKnight right now, and I realize there is more evidence for the crucifixion than against it.  I have said this before, I do not necessarily agree with Seth's version of the crucifixion.  I of course have to rule it as an extremely small possibility simply because I do not know the truth for sure, and closing it out would not be an open minded thing to do.  The biblical version resonates with me more than Seth's version does.  

I am not promoting false biblical info.  I simply posted an article relating to the season which I found very interesting.  I agree that the nativity story is false.  There is no harm in that.  The point of my statement about realizing what is true and what is false concerning the bible is that it is important not to believe that any one source of information is the absolute truth, unless that source is your inner self.

I have respect for Edgar Cayce's work, although I have never read any(yet), just as I have respect for Jane Roberts and Robert Monroe, and any other individual who promotes spiritual growth and personal fulfillment and the evolution of human consciousness.  I will definitely get around to reading Cayce.  Hopefully he can expand my perceptions even more.

Let me tell you why I am loving Roslind McKnight's book so much.  My belief system has been shaped by my own personal experience and the experience of others who are explorers, like me, but even more innovative and advance in their travels and spiritual attunement.  The reason their work is so credible to me is that we share these experiences of nonphysical reality, of leaving our bodies, of the reality of our dreamstate, and also have very similar ways of thinking.  The Seth material is different, because this is not a human sharing their experiences, it is a being on a totally other level.  The reason it is so credible to me is because I see the truth of it in my daily life.  The Seth material also answered many unanswered questions about reality I had acquired as I tried to construct a stable believe system as I experienced more and learned more.  The Seth material has given me an exponentially larger perspective on reality, and has helped me to experience much more meaning and fulfillment in my life.  The reason Seth's material was so credible to me is that it almost perfectly aligned with my "before-Seth" belief system.  This old system was based on the works of Monroe and others of a similar truth-bearing nature.  What Seth did was added onto these concepts of the afterlife and nonphysical dimensions and life's philosophies in a coherent nature which allowed me to piece together my own belief system in an interconnective manner, which has generated my own inner being to come out and influence my life even more.  I do realize that no source has all the answers, and I do not read Seth as if it was the word of God.  

So back to why I love McKnights book.  As I am reading what she is experiencing, and what her helpers are communicating to her, I realize... this is all so true.  And I realize another thing.. all of what is being said is also said by Seth!  Trust me, after almost 10 months straight of reading Seth, the material is still fresh in my mind.  Everything she said confirmed so many of my beliefs in the nature of consciousness and creation and reality and many other concepts.  It was as if she was saying exactly what seth said, only in a more basic, simplified, less-detailed and technical manner.  It was as if she was experiencing the concepts Seth talked about, especially as she entered different states of consciousness and described them.  It reminded me of you, Justin, and the way you support McKnight and deny Seth, and yet it is so apparent that they are actually complimentary.  Except of course the bit about the crucifixion.  This is the only point where they diverge.  

 Alright Dude, I guess i now see better where you are coming from.  I'm not so sure that so much of the nativity story is so false.  I'm not a bible literalist by any means, and realize that its been both purposely edited for manipulative, control reasons, and also just errors due to re translations and multiple copying.  
  However, like Albert, i've gotten both inner guidance, and have come upon good outer sources which seem to affirm that the N.T. is largely correct in its basic story format, including much of the birth, teaching, death, and resurrection parts.  

 I'm a bit surprised by some of what you said in the above, especially about you resonating more with the biblical death version than Seth's stuff.   I remember it wasn't all that long ago when you were strongly arguing that Jesus probably didn't even ever exist as a physical person, and that peoples nonphysical experiences only occurred because Christianity has become a powerful thoughtform.    I remember things like that.   When it comes to the subject of Yeshua and his life, you seem to have been very extreme.

  It seems like you have quite changed your mind since these times.

 Me personally, i don't think Seth's version of Christ's life towards the end, is such a little deal and i don't so casually gloss it over.  He states that Jesus and/or his disciples had another would be Messiah drugged to take his place to be crucified and that this did happen.  

 This makes Yeshua seem rather umm unethical to say the least.  Also, with no crucifixion, there is no Resurrection, and i happen to believe that was the main point of Yeshua's whole life and message beyond the general PUL aspect.  In any case, the Resurrection grew out of PUL, PUL is life, God is love, God is life, love and life energy are also synonymous, all this in all dimensions.  Live that which is truly life, love, and Godly enough and the body physical even stays revivified.  

 Even if that is the only thing that Seth possibly states in error, well to me is it a big enough one to question the entire thing, because again I don't have any way to verify independently that Seth has material world verifications in connection with same.   I'm not just willing to take Robert Butts word for it.  Most of what i have read of Seth, is very general and philosophical in nature.   And actually, much of that general info i more or less agree with.   When i was reading it, most of it wasn't anything really "new" or revelatory to me, much of the stuff i had either read in other places, or had already had intuitions about.  

 If Seth is truly a nonphysical and spiritually mature consciousness, and Jane Roberts hooked up to him in a clearer way, then why would Seth via Roberts make such a erroneous and clearly diminishing statement about one of the most important aspects of Yeshua's life and example?  
His whole life was about PUL, and the highest kind of PUL oft requires self sacrifice from the little self for the greater good of the Whole.   Do you think it was easy, even for him, to go to his torture and death for a humanity who little appreciated him then, and still really doesn't even today?  Most people hated and despised him then, and many still do.

  Don't you think, as a man, as someone with still some human remnants in him, that there was some challenge in all this?   In the transcending of his last self attachments, and saying YES in the garden, i will do it, for it is the will of the Creative Forces because it is for the highest good for all, in that came the Resurrection experience and Consciousness.  
When the bible says, "he died for our sins", it doesn't mean literally, but symbolically.   He came to rectify certain false beliefs about humanity and the whole process we go through, and to do that, there was self sacrifice involved otherwise in the garden he would not have asked that there might possibly be some other way.  

 From evidence on the Shroud, we can tell that the man did experience pain and physical weakness, for there are indications that at some point his knee buckled and got banged up in that.   It was no walk in the park, and yet once he made his decision in the garden, he went to this fate joyously because he knew that it would help humanity.   Cayce said he even joked on the way to Calvary, and that is what most infuriated the authorities then.  

 As much as i dislike orthodox Christianity, and the whole religious thing, in the past i've asked guidance and have wondered what would have happened if none of it ever happened.  I got the impression that we would have experienced even much darker times than we did with the Church.   The Church and its influence, though corrupt and self serving in many ways, came on the heels of the likes of Vikings and such groups, who had NO morality whatsoever.  

It's quite likely that if Christianity didn't arise, even in its skewed form as it did, that such barbaric peoples would have overrun the world and it would be a very different place than it is.    Personally i wish that Christianity had survived in its pure form, as Yeshua had taught it, but i've been told that it just wasn't possible for the times and current developement of humanity as a whole..

  And why couldn't have Yeshua been "virgin born"?

 Btw, i'm glad you are enjoying McKnight's book.  It is one of the most fast vibrating, clear, balanced, and holistically deep books i have ever come across.   I got instant and deep "good vibes" from it, even before really reading it in depth.  

  Since you are also born under Capricorn technically, you may enjoy this true story.  In a part of Cosmic Journey's about Retrievals, Rosiland's guidance mentions something about Rosiland's special Capricorn energy, which apparently facilitated her ability to do such Retrieval work.  

  Being born under Capricorn myself, i naturally was curious about this, and also curious to if Rosiland knew if she had any strong Capricorn energy in her chart.   On a lark, i decided to email her and ask her this.  

 Turned out we have the same b-day.  We became acquaintances, and my wife and I have had dinner with her.  She is a very lovely and down to Earth lady.  She really does emanate very "old Soul" and loving vibes.   Even before i met her in person, i had a feeling that her work at TMI and with Monroe was very important and deep indeed.   I sense very little major "skewing" in her work, which is kind of unusual for me when looking into channeled work.  

 I guess what i'm saying is that her work is one of the few channeled works that i really trust a lot, and one that i almost completely resonate almost 100 percent with.  

 

identcat wrote on Jan 4^th, 2009 at 11:56am:

I, too have read several accounts from "seers" who discount the immaculte conception and attribuite it to Extra Terrestials. As in Whitney Strieber's books "Communion" and "Transformation" and in Irish lure: Extra Terrestials came to the planet and instilled their seed into primitive man in order to obtain a "likeness" to themselves who would be adaptable to the planets eco system. Edgar Caycee also stated the the immiculate conception was instilled this way (embro synthesis). This is supposidly how major brilliant minds like Einstein, Michaelangelo, Newton all came to be. Sometime it's not good enough just to know things. Sometimes you just have to believe!!!  :P ;D

 Hi Cat,

 I don't remember Cayce ever saying that specifically, though there does seem to be a link between E.T.'s and some unusual human births in this source.   But it was approached very generally.  

  Also, if you read some of my earlier posts on this thread, you will see that i point out that Cayce's source seems to infer that there are actually two kinds of "immaculate conception."

 One is wholly a spiritual, Spirit pushing itself into matter, activity, and the other is E.T. caused.  

  Cayce's source seems to say that the former is what happened with Yeshua and his birth, and seems to say that the latter is what happened with a "past life" of his whose name was Ra Tah.  

  I believe that E.T.'s sometimes influence some human births, not because of what i've read in this or that book, but because of some experiences relating to me.  

 My Mom had childhood illnesses, and various doctors told her that she would never be able to have children.  She very much longed for a son, and kept trying even though she had miscarriage after miscarriage.  

   One night she had a very vivid dream about being on a spaceship with some very familiar and loving non human Beings.  They told her everything was going to be alright.  It wasn't that long after this dream that she successfully had me.    I have a hard time believing that it was just a coincidence, and i believe the E.T.'s must have helped out in the process.  

 Btw, i'm not saying that i'm "immaculately conceived" in any sense of the word.  I have no idea about that part. My Mom was definitely not a virgin.   But because of this info, along with my own intuition, stuff in the Cayce readings, in McKnight's work, i do very much believe that E.T.'s influence both births and genetics of some human beings here and there (they seem to be doing it more lately).  With folks that are meant to act as forerunners of new consciousness developments in the Earth, such as with Ra Tah way back when.  

Quote:

I'm a bit surprised by some of what you said in the above, especially about you resonating more with the biblical death version than Seth's stuff.   I remember it wasn't all that long ago when you were strongly arguing that Jesus probably didn't even ever exist as a physical person, and that peoples nonphysical experiences only occurred because Christianity has become a powerful thoughtform.    I remember things like that.   When it comes to the subject of Yeshua and his life, you seem to have been very extreme.  It seems like you have quite changed your mind since these times.

This is true.  A little over a year ago I was kinda mixed up when it came to Jesus.  At this time I had never experienced Christ's essence, and because of the many similarities in his story with the stories of past religious figures, I figured J's story could only be a plagerism from older religions.  I now believe this is wrong, for I have had several at least semi-conscious experiences with Jesus.  I am not debating Christ's existence or importance.

Seth never states that Jesus was a part of the "crucifixion scandal."  And I disagree that this one discrepancy, if false, negates the validity of the rest of the material.  Don't you think its funny that McKnights work ties in so nicely with Seth's?  Except for the one aspect about the crucifixion, most of what she says and experiences is already said by Seth.  As I am reading Cosmic Journeys, I am thinking... this is all so true, I fully agree, and this is amazing that she can experience this knowledge, and yet still there are still higher aspects to what she finds which are described by Seth that she does not go into.  

The reason why what you have read of Seth's material is general and philosophical in nature is because in his early books he lays the groundwork, the basis, for his later books, which dive much deeper into more advanced and detailed subject matter which without the general knowledge of the first books, just wouldn't make much sense to the average reader.  Seth actually states that his work is meant to lead up to his books The Individual and Dreams, Evolution, and Value Fulfillment, which are basically his masterpieces, his most important works, which use the general knowledge of the past works as a platform to launch into the good stuff.  

I'm not trying to promote Seth.  I'm just trying to let you see that I am not crazy for reading his books, and that he is not as bad as everyone is trying to make him seem.  Its hard for me not to speak up when someone posts lies and misinformation, or tries to distort what is said to fit their negative beliefs about him, for I respect his work and his cause.  

Justin--- I do think that your mom was blessed! To have a higher technology step in and help her with her quest-- what a privlege. Strieber describes how the procedure is undertaken. He thought that he was going crazy, (in "Transformations") and contacted Bob Monroe. They both lived in NY state at the time. Monroe assured him that he wasn't going crazy. By reading his book, I found my way to the Monroe Institue web page.

I've read both of Rossaling McKnight's books "Cosmic Journey" and "Soul Journey" and I met her at the Monroe Institute during my Guidelines week. She is very down to earth and glows like and angel. I would have to reread her books to remember all that was in them. But, she had no quams about Et's and their purpose of doing good for earthlings. I think that it was Rosie who stated that a space ship landed on the Monroe property in Virginia and one of the participants went out to greet them.  My closest contact to ET's are the orbs.  I can't say that I physicall see them--- only through photo's taken.

Yes, I truely think that a higher life form has a definate influence on human beings--- all throughout our history. --cat

I Am Dude wrote on Jan 5^th, 2009 at 12:55pm:

[quote] Its hard for me not to speak up when someone posts lies and misinformation, or tries to distort what is said to fit their negative beliefs about him, for I respect his work and his cause.

 Yes, and as you feel about Seth, i feel about Yeshua likewise.  So in Seth's latter works, he gives various info which can be checked against factual material world info--stuff which can be "verified" as we call it?  What about his more specific statements which so far seem to be rather off, like the Bishop lifetime and the crucifixion parts?

 In any case, I will have to see for myself and if i have the time i will check out those latter books.

 I still get the sense that you tend to approach outer sources more intellectually than i do (hence why the difference in our initial perceptions of Roberts/Seth), and that for me, it's more of purely intuition kind of thing.   When i was reading Seth, i got very different "vibes" than when i was reading Rosiland's stuff.  The similarity is that mentally, both deal a lot with "consciousness" and the nature of same.

 As i've noted before, it's interesting to note that both Rosiland and Cayces guidance doesn't generally "name names" when it comes to themselves, even when repeatedly asked.   It's interesting to note that these are all more of a group kind of energy.  

 It's interesting to note that Seth not only names his name, but at some points talks quite a bit about himself, and also seems to be less of a group energy.  These are as clues to the truly impersonal and PUL attuned nature of these respective channeled sources...

 There is a part in one of Roberts books that i read, wherein Seth goes on this rebellious rant about him not following convention or something.  He (or Roberts) almost sounds rather angry.  At the time, he sounded like an angry teenager to me.  

 When one approaches such a source like Seth more intellectually/mentally polarized, it's easy to get caught up in such a source for it IS mentally interesting.   But from what you say, it seems that the latter works have a different, and more PUL oriented vibe.  
Funny enough, i find that PUL orientation and vibe throughout all of Rosies, Bruces, and Cayces work from the beginning to the end.  

 I cannot convince you of anything, so i really should just stop.  I had thought i had let it go earlier, but i guess i didn't fully.  

 If you haven't already done this, i suggest a specific experiment. Something quick and easy to do. Sometime during meditation, ask to hook up to the most expanded, PUL attuned energies/guidance within and without self, also try to remember the feeling of love when doing same and sincerely feel/give appreciation for any answers you may receive.  

 Then ask about Jane Roberts and Seth, and the true nature of same generally speaking.   Ask them if the former misrepresent Christ and his life.   Sometimes we have to go deep within for the truer answers and perceptions of things.

 Thanks Cat.  My Mom was a very loving, spiritually oriented, and aware person, and i will feel eternally grateful that she was my first teacher in this physical life.  

 Interesting about the Strieber Monroe connections and all that.

 I've had quite a few, different kind of ET contacts, everything from dreams, to seeing UFO's (and orbs), to one bizarre and very real seeming OBE encounter, and having strong intuitions about them.  

 I think they are big part of the whole "2nd Coming" and spiritual transformation thing.   Some of these groups "work" for Christ, one could say.   This is to be a mult-layered and spread out developement, though it does actually involve Christ himself showing up publicly in physical form again.  

 And yes, Rosie rocks.  She is one of my "role models".  

Hey Dude-

Here's the thing- let's assume that Seth really is a disembodied, highly evolved entity whose objective is to enlighten us as to the nature of reality and the afterlife.

If we accept that premise, then we are left with a really difficult pill to swallow.  Because, if Seth's story that Jesus was never crucified is not true, how can we possibly accept anything else Seth says?

I mean, this is not just an ordinary mistake.  It is a major, deliberate  misrepresentation of a huge historical event.

That should give us pause, should it not?  

Let's assume Seth was a college professor, and he told his class that Jesus was never crucified. And then later the class, via reading the works of biblical scholars and yes, other channeled material, came to realize that what their prof said was totally wrong.

Wouldn't that discredit virtually every other thing the prof had to say?  How could anyone acknowledge that Seth was wrong about this event, and yet proceed to accept other things he proclaimed??

All of this leaves us with a couple of alternatives:  (1) Either Seth actually believed that Jesus was never crucified OR (2) it was a deliberate falsification.

If the former, Seth was pretty ill-informed to say the least.  If the latter, we have to wonder about WHY Seth (or Jane) would deliberately mislead us about such a crucial event.  

I have my own theory, for what it's worth.  I think we always need to ask ourselves what the agenda is before we accept anything someone else tells us.  That goes for the car dealer down the road or the latest Hollywood movie or the channeled entity du jour.

I personally think Seth or Jane's agenda is to discredit Jesus.  And the way you do that is not to just come out and try to undermine everything Jesus says.  You don't discredit someone with a club.  You do it with more subtle means.  If folks believe that the crucifixion never happened, it's a short leap to start wondering about things the Bible says about Jesus.  Heck, if the most significant event about his life never took place, maybe other things are bogus as well.  It's a slippery slope.

Same thing goes for ACIM.  Sure, you can pick out passages and say isn't it wonderful, but what is the bottom line of the Course?  Anyone who spends ten minutes reading various passages in the Bible that Jesus said, and then reads ACIM, cannot possibly believe that the same person authored both books!  The Biblical Jesus was very clear about sin and the wages of sin, but the ACIM Jesus tells us sin is just an illusion and there's no reason to have any guilt about what we do because, hey folks, the evil act never took place!  Huh??  

And just as a footnote, Seth kind of steps in it big time when he tells us Jesus was never crucified, because in other places he tells us due to the law of probabilities, every possible outcome of an event really does take place!  So, by Seth's own statement, there was a historical scenario in which Jesus WAS crucified.

Kind of makes you wonder how so many people are taken in by this stuff.

R







In either case, the conclusions have to be unsettling.

I have to throw my ball in Justin's court here.  Initially, when I read Seth Speaks, it was an amazing experience.  For those trying to understand how thought creates reality Roberts/Seth came up with a very cogent system - one that does expand your awareness, if you never thought about this before.  I couldn't get enough of the Seth material and read through everything.  But it was more an intellectual exercise than a spiritual journey.  I felt no love or PUL associated with it.  Somewhere along the line, I realized that JR/Seth was just that - a cogent system of metaphysics and philosophy, but there was no tie in with PUL and the super-reality of what I consider to be a union with God and the universe.  

Don posted some interesting information about JR and Seth at one time.  That she worked with a priest I believe who noted that she became angry, erratic and her health deteriorated toward the end of her life (which was cut short at age 55.  Furthermore, a note of extreme caution is that communications with "Seth" began as ouija board contacts.  For anyone famliar with after death communications, the ouija board has been associated by many sources as being frought with interactions with lower level entities and mischief.  As described:      

"In late 1963, Jane Roberts and her husband, Robert Butts, experimented with a Ouijaboard as part of Roberts' research for a book on extra-sensory perception. According to Roberts and Butts, on December 2, 1963 they began to receive coherent messages from a male personality who eventually identified himself as Seth. Soon after, Roberts reported that she was hearing the messages in her head. She began to dictate the messages instead of using the Ouija board, and the board was eventually abandoned. For 21 years until Roberts' death in 1984 (with a one-year hiatus due to her final illness), Roberts held regular sessions in which she went into a trance and purportedly spoke on behalf of Seth. Butts served as stenographer, taking the messages down in home-made shorthand, although some sessions were recorded. These messages, channeled from Seth through Roberts, consisting mostly of monologues on a wide variety of topics, are collectively known as the "Seth Material".

 It didn't sound pretty, and certainly seemed like an ending of life devoid of PUL and spirituality.  We are all prone to human frailties, but when all put together, the ouija board contact, the deterioration of her health and sanity toward the end, it sounds like misdirection to me.

The problem I have with Seth material is that it is such a cogent system of thought put down on paper that its followers refer to this or that passage from Seth, to support their feelings about something or other in the physical/spiritual world.   As if this, non-human alien being "channeled" through JR is the last word for us about the spiritual and physical planes.  Pullleeazzee.  

Insight must be guided by love and personal exploration.  But Seth material is channeled, and readers take it to literally as "the gospel" of how reality is set up.  

Just my two cents of course.  I'm a fan of Seth's main premise that thought creates reality.  But my own instincts and guidance has informed me that there is not much PUL to be found in the material, and to stay away from it, now that I've moved on in other ways.

Matthew

Doc-

Much the same thing happened to Helen Schucman who channeled Jesus in ACIM.  She also went through emotional suffering towards end of her life.

And btw, your point about PUL and Seth can also be said about ACIM.  Nowhere, when reading what Jesus allegedly says in the book, do I have a feeling that there is love behind any of it.  In fact, at times "Jesus" seems to actually be having a bad hair day.  He tends to get cajoling and even hectoring whereas in other parts he is extremely compassionate and kind.

Just doesn't compute.

R

Regarding what Rondelle wrote on some of his posts, it is true that if a source was trying to intentionally deceive people, it would provide all kinds of good information in order to make people believers, and then try to sneak in some false information.

As I wrote on another thread, in the two Seth books I have, Jane Roberts Seth spoke of three of Jesus' most famous sayings and interpreted them so they lacked spiritual meaning. None of Jesus' sayings, as recorded in the gospels, were interpreted by Jane Roberts Seth in a spiritual manner. If one believes what Jane Roberts Seth had to say about these three verses and her/his denial of the crucifixion, what conclusion are you left with? That the gospels can't be relied on as an accurate source of information.  Therefore, rely on what Jane Roberts Seth have to say instead (not I).

I understand that there is a lot of history as to how the gospels were put together, and errors are possible. However, when I listen to my heart and common sense, I interpret what the gospels are about quite differently than Jane Roberts Seth.

I keep saying "Jane Robert Seth," because I believe there is too much of a possibility that Jane Roberts and perhaps her husband read a bunch of metaphysical books and then came up with their material. To the extent they interpreted things correctly, the information is valid.

Even if the material helps a person expand to a certain extent, it is possible that it doesn't help a person do so in the best way possible. Spiritual growth requires various ingredients in order for it to be balanced. If it takes place in a manner where one doesn't have love and reverence for that which is divine, it is possible that one's growth isn't as balanced as it needs to be.  One also learns to discriminate and not make excuses for questionable sources of information, when one grows in a balanced way.

Justin

I agree that the Seth material is of a different vibration than say Monroe and McKnight and such.  To me it has a more mysterious vibe, and requires the full use of both the intellect and the intuitions, for some of this material describing the greater nature of reality lies outside the realm of the human intellect.  I don't believe this to be a negative thing, however.  In any case, I will most definitely meditate on this.  I usually trust my intuitions in situations such as this.  I honestly feel I use an equal proportion of both my intellect and my intuitions when searching for knowledge.  I also believe I am good at recognizing my intuitions.  I believe what is happening here is that we simply have different intuitions regarding the Seth material.  At any rate, I think it is fine that we have different beliefs regarding this, for it seems that both of our current belief systems are working for us.  I know my is anyway, and I feel yours is as well.

Rondele/Doc/Recoverer


Quote:

I personally think Seth or Jane's agenda is to discredit Jesus.

This is rather obserd to think that more than 20 books of material were all just to trick us into believing one page.  The reasons I believe that most of his information is correct are (1) I have had many experiences both before and after reading his material that backs up many of his ideas.  (2) His concepts of the nature of reality are also shared by many explorers of consciousness of various backgrounds.  

I honestly feel like I am the most qualified one here to make judgements regarding Seth's work because 1. I have the most knowledge of his work and 2. I have never had to put up my defenses when reading something, including Seth's work, as many here have had to do when reading his Jesus segment, and therefore have no bias to cloud my judgement.  I read what he said about the crucifixion, thought, hmm thats interesting, and moved on.  I did not store it in my "this is true" box, but rather in my "interesting but I don't know.." box.  I did not store it in my "this is absolutely false because it does not align with my current belief system and generates fear within me!" box.  This is not a good box to keep around.  

And so I was able to get the most out of Seth's material and continued to see it with an open mind, even if I did not necessarily agree with every aspect of his work.  Even the most advanced beings are capable of making mistakes.  Seth admits himself that he does not know all the answers, but like us is constantly learning more about his reality.  However, it is not my intention to make excuses for Seth, and I must admit I do not know why Seth said this, just as I don't know if it is true or not.  But neither does anyone else, and so we arrive out our personal conclusions which result from our belief systems.  I am not the one putting down people's believe systems here.  

Seth speaks extensively about love being the driving force in the universe.  It is crazy to think that someone can read one chapter and believe they know the entire book, or read one book and believe they know the entire body of work.  

It is true that spiritual growth requires various ingredients, and Seth does not claim to be the only ingredient, or even the key ingredient.  Rather we both share the belief that they key ingredients are oneness with your self, oneness with nature and the universe, and oneness with god.  I strongly believe that if you had the knowledge of his work that I have most of your negative opinions regarding Seth would not exist.  

 Hi OOB Dude,

 Yes, i also believe and get the sense that you are fairly intuitive person, obviously rather intelligent, and pretty balanced between the two.   Because of the former, i'm a bit surprised by your perceptions and beliefs about all this.

 I don't debate with people i think i would be just wasting my time with.  I sense a lot of latent and expressed potential in you, heck on another thread i said that i get the sense that you have the potential to become like a Yeshua in this life, a full Light being in the flesh.  There are not many i would say that about.  So far, i've only met a few in this life that i sensed that kind of probable or possible potential.

 However, i do think you are holding limiting beliefs regarding Jane's work.  Because of the energy/consciousness Law of Like attracts and begets like or called that of "vibration resonation",  the channel and their energies, has a LOT to do with the kind of Consciousnesses and energies attracted to same.
Anyways, that's why i suggested what i did (about the meditation experiment), because i believe that you CAN get clear answers about this if you go deep enough and let go of preconceptions for a bit during same.
 Either way, since you are also quite attracted to what i perceive as very fast vibrating and PUL centered sources, i'm not all that concerned.  

  Sorry if i have come off too pushy and all knowing in these debates, and have hurt your feelings in any way.  It's one of the few issues that i still get overly passionate about sometimes, and in doing so i sometimes forget empathy and consideration of anothers feelings.  I did get the sense that you are like me in that you are quite alright with people debating with you, so i kind of let myself go a bit overboard.  

OOBD,

 A couple of times you have stated how alike Rosiland's guidance material is to Seth's.  I recently watched this video wherein it shares a voice recording of Seth talking philosophy.  

  Here is the link: http://vodpod.com/watch/1181974-seth-material-jane-roberts

 In this video Roberts/Seth talks about physical matter and how our consciousness became involved with same.   From what i get of it, "Seth" is putting the physical on a pedestal, and says that there is no error in our involvement with physicality.  That our flesh is a great spiritual reality.

 McKnight's guidance gives a rather different view.  They seem to outline that due to freewill, some Consciousnesses decided to split themselves, and to indulge in illusions and separation from Source and each other, and that our physical existence is the result of this (and why suffering/fear is such a strong tendency in the physical).   They seem to indicate that it wasn't a necessity or ultimately desirable ever, and as long as Souls via humanity, continue to be attached to illusion within, we will experience physicality as we now do.  
 They say that once Souls release these illusions and attachments within self, that they not experience the illusion of physicality and its seeming limitations anymore.  

 Rosie's guidance in that sense, is quite similar to Cayce's.  They both seem to say that our job as spiritual beings is to take the super slow vibratory level and illusionary nature of physicality which we temporally manifested, and raise it again to that of pure Light energy of which we originally experienced before we decided to indulge in illusion, false temporal ways and beliefs.  They both agree that the main way to do that is through living and being universal, pure love consciousness, realizing the essential Oneness of Creation.  They both highlight Yeshua as the highest and purest example of a human doing just that, and so totally coming to know while still connected to physical, how unlimited he really was.   So unlimited that neither space, nor time, nor death confined him whatsoever.  

 Again, Seth seems to put the physical on a pedestal and say that there was no error on our parts ever in being involved with same.  Furthermore, "he" emphatically states to NOT to listen to any source which tells us differently, that there was spiritual error (sin) on our parts in this whole thing.   That such sources are ignorant and living in the dark.  

 So yes, even with a little research, there are major differences and discrepancies found between these two sources beyond the Yeshua info.

 Also, it's interesting to note that I've heard a recording of Rosiland's channeling of her guidance (at TMI, part of the "Patrick event"), and also a rare recording snippet of Cayce's while he was in his deep trance state and giving a "reading".   Interestingly, both speak in a more flat and monotone type voice like we would expect from a truly nonphysical being who is not so emotionally centered and dramatic as many of us humans are.  

 On the other hand, this was the first time I listened to a actual recording of Roberts channeling Seth, and well I couldn't help but giggle a little because it sounds so blatantly like what one would expect of cheesy campy "channeling", something that like Hollywood might portray and any decent actor with an imagination and suggestible personality could easily slip into.   I could imitate both Roberts and "Seth".   And believe you me, i could ramble on for hours about philosophy no problem, but that is not an indication of my divine knowledge and great expandedness.   ;)

 Seth doesn't sound all that nonphysical, with all that emotion and drama in his voice.   You would expect a highly spiritually mature nonphysical Being to talk much less emphatically and emotionally, because from my experiences of more developed nonphysicals, they often lack the strong emotional qualities that we humans are so well known for (especially noticeable in many E.T.'s).  Not that they don't have feelings, or don't feel, but they don't have exaggerated emotions and because of their deep calm and stillness they would come off as more "flat".  

 Just as we find with Rosiland's work and Cayce's.   Actually, i've read similar from some Regressionists/hypnotherapists whose clients went into a deep state, and their Greater Self, or an Ascended type being came through.   Similar emotional detachment in their voice, very "matter of fact".   Not a singing and loud "SORRRROOOOWW and DEGRAAADATION", in a silly half Jamaican and half English aristocratic accent.  

 With that said, Rosiland's guidance sometimes had a slight Asiatic accent, when "Ah So" was more primarily being focused through.

  You don't need deep intuition to see through Roberts and her so called channeling, just some common spiritual sense and holistic reasoning is enough.  Why is it that the only other "entities" that Roberts channeled were famous painters?  

 Why is it that in Monroe's first biography, it is discussed that Roberts and Monroe met up, but Monroe remains curiously silent about "Seth" and the whole thing, BUT relates later having an interesting run in with another well known channeler and more specifically her guide Ramtha?  

 Maybe "Seth" didn't exist except as eventually as an unconscious thoughtform of Roberts, who was working through various unconscious issues relating to the nature of physicality and our involvement with same?   Hence, a person with both Sun AND Moon in Taurus (one of the most innately material minded/oriented signs there are) would want to believe it is alright to be sensuous, physical, and materially oriented, but felt conflicted because many spiritual belief systems say to get beyond those attachments...   That there is a far greater "joy" (as Roberts Seth terms it), beyond anything the flesh could possibly offer.  

 For myself, i know this as reality and fact, and when a supposed channeled being tells me differently, and otherwise disagrees with certain key issues, well I wonder just how expanded such a source really is.  
 

<<This is rather obserd to think that more than 20 books of material were all just to trick us into believing one page>>

Hi Dude-

Yes, it's only one page.  But Seth's claim on that one page undermines all of Christianity.  If we accept that Jesus was never crucified, what does that mean in terms of His resurrection??

And once we doubt the resurrection, we might as well toss out the crux of Christianity.

It's quite a page, wouldn't you agree?

So again, either Seth didn't know that Jesus was crucified or he deliberately made up a story alleging that He wasn't.

Either way it presents a pretty big problem about Seth's credibility.

R

Hi Dude,

First, don't get the impression that you are being ganged up on - you aren't.  As to your comment:

"honestly feel like I am the most qualified one here to make judgements regarding Seth's work because 1. I have the most knowledge of his work and 2. I have never had to put up my defenses when reading something, including Seth's work, as many here have had to do when reading his Jesus segment, and therefore have no bias to cloud my judgement."

This is a bit pompous (no offense, as there are many on this forum who are quite well read and have gone through the material, including myself.)  You didn't addresss my comments specifically (I was less focused on the Jesus/Yeshua issue), and more on the source.

Overall, I feel there is much truth in the extremely coherent Sethian/Roberts metaphysics.  I don't like the way the nature of reality is dictated through the channel as if the absolute truth is one sided.  If you are a true reader of Roberts, you can't help but notice that Seth makes opinionated statements, and discounts certain other opinions.  Of all the loving souls I have met on my journeys, I have not often found this form of lecturing to and self-assuredness about the way things are.  

Listen to Monroe, Moen, and other explorers.  Do they have the answers?  No, they report back their findings, but encourage you to explore.  Thus, what kind of being must dwell on the reality of the crucifixtion and discount it?  

One can not take Seth's comments about historical facts as being too serious.  Earthly incarnate entities tend to have the best recall about earthly events.  As Swedenborg and other explorers have found, our ability to quote chapter and verse about earthly matters does tend to suffer when we have no spiritual equivalent for what is found on earth (in spirit).  As an example, Seth at one point mentions that he Oscar Wilde was one of his incarnations.  Yet he provides no account of Wilde's life and, in fact none of his dictations have the phrasings or wit commonly seen in Wilde's writings.  Truth?  Deception?  Who knows?

I also stand by my comments about Roberts initial contact with Seth via Ouija board, and the many various sources which warn of the dangers associated with ouija board contact with negative entities.  Put together with Roberts early death and illness, and other factors, one can't help but wonder at the nature of the communication or the communicator.  

The metaphysics of Seth is truly coherent, impressive and similar to other modern spiritual thinking.  For those initially exploring spirituality, the ideas can open doors in the mind.  My main problem was with the nature of the communication, the elevation of the communicator to an "expert" authority on spirituality/reality, instead of the encouragement and pursuit of the exploration of others.  

In this game, those who know, who act lovingly do less dictating, and more to help others explore and become more loving.

Just my opinion.
Matthew

I don't really have a stake in this thread since it got off the Nativity, but Matthew--why is an early death a punishment and not a reward? I know its kind of off topic but Roberts early death has been brought up a couple of times and I wonder about that. We place a lot of emphasis on the afterlife in here...duh, and it puzzles me why a death in middle age would be considered so dreadful. And one other thing that comes my mind because of this the actual topic being discussed now: Is belief int he resurrection necessary to achieving greater understanding of PUL? and maybe that's a different topic, but we got from the nativity to the resurrection so I thought I'd throw it out there. I've enjoyed following this discussion greatly and many thanks to Dude for bringing it up.

Yours,
Beau

The early death alone is not related to any flaw in spirituality.  Many times "the good die young."  However, if you read about the angst and tribulation of Roberts' life, and how she physically and emotionally worsened as the channeling continued, one seems to conclude that despite the words dictated, this was not a positive experience/relationship for her.  There is a text, Speaking of Jane Roberts that goes into this in more detail.

To me, it is not surprising.  Unlike spiritual exploring where we try to reach out ourselves, channeling, invites another entity of almost any level (including lower levels) to enter us, to speak through us, without the channeler making spiritual contact or following a path toward love.  

M

DocM wrote on Jan 6^th, 2009 at 10:50am:

The early death alone is not related to any flaw in spirituality.  Many times "the good die young."  However, if you read about the angst and tribulation of Roberts' life, and how she physically and emotionally worsened as the channeling continued, one seems to conclude that despite the words dictated, this was not a positive experience/relationship for her.  There is a text, Speaking of Jane Roberts that goes into this in more detail. To me, it is not surprising.  Unlike spiritual exploring where we try to reach out ourselves, channeling, invites another entity of almost any level (including lower levels) to enter us, to speak through us, without the channeler making spiritual contact or following a path toward love.   M

 Exactly Matthew!   Now, i look at say Bruce for example.  He somewhat recently went through some major challenge along the illness lines himself, but despite that (and that i don't really know him), i get the strong sense that Bruce is basically a consistently happy and at peace person.

 Rosiland McKnight, well she's been through some major testing and challenge in her long life as well, and having met her a couple of times and having talked with her via email for a few years now, i can say that she is just one of those people who glows.  Cat also got a similar impression of her when meeting her.

 The channel, and how they live their life, their intentions, their deeper motivations, their degree of spiritual developement etc. are very important considerations in understanding the nature of the psychic energies attracted and resonated with same.  

 Most things (especially in the psychic and channeled world) run according to the great, universal law of energy resonation/like attracts and begets like.

  And my other point is, by pointing to the example of Bruce and Rosiland, is that if one is consistently hooking up to, and especially over long periods of time, very PUL centered energies within and without self, then this eventually MUST bring joy, peace, and a deeper centeredness despite even outer material challenges.  

 What happens when we allow ourselves to hook up to slower vibrating, more materialistic, and less PUL centered energies within and without self?   An ever growing sense of angst, emotional imbalance, depression, despair, anger, non appreciation, and at times even the grave and early deterioration of the physical body.  

For the body is an instrument and eventually responds negatively to the consistent bad playing of it both physically as well as mentally and spiritually.   This is why if one living purely enough according to love, then one could so prolong their years way beyond current expected numbers, as both McKnight's and Cayce's guidance (and also the Bible seems to suggest) outlines.   That PUL revivifies, revitalizes, balances, and strengthens not only the mind and Soul, but also the physical vehicle eventually too.

 What do we find in both Jane Roberts and Helen who dictated ACIM and who "hated that goddam book" and spirituality in general towards the end of her life.    

 It's important to consider the deeper holism in this whole psychic and channeling phenomenon, especially in relation to the channel through which the info comes.  

 Now, this doesn't mean that real and basically loving channels who hook up to more loving energies than not, won't ever experience depression, anger or what not.  Of course that's a possibility, but the point is is that their spirituality helps them to pull through it and to become centered, joyous and at peace again.   Their depression, anger, and uncenteredness are temporal in experience and they usually die in joy and in peace.

 It is so important to retain a balance and activity of the left brain side of things when becoming involved in spirituality and the New age world.  If we are also intuitive and can sense things on a feeling and more purely right brain level, the left brain activity and balance can help us to understand and to discriminate what's going on.

 Without that balance, we are as a little ship on a great undifferentiated Ocean with no paddle or rudder.  (Yet, to have little or no Heart awareness is far worse experience and developement and leads to a materialistic Frankenstein).

Justin

I am convinced that Seth was a separate entity, if you are not that is fine.  I do not intend to debate this issue.  

I am curious, you said you believe I hold limiting beliefs regarding Seth.  Which beliefs do I hold that limit me?  Maybe you see something that I don't.  I'm not saying you're wrong, just that I don't see it.

I am surprised that you feel our physical existence is not so important.  You think Seth puts our physical existence on a pedestal... so where should it be?  Under the rug?  Those who do not put their physical existence on a pedestal are those who do not live life to the fullest.  I fully disagree with you on this one.  

So you believe we did not choose our physical existence per say, but rather we chose to believe we are separate from source and so our existence in the physical resulted from that...  That seems to go against what Monroe believed, which is strange because him and McKnight seemed to be on the same page about this stuff.  Monroe believed we chose this physical life for the unique experience of physicality.  

I think it is the other way around from what you beleive... I think we chose this physical existence not to separate ourselves from source, but to experience ourselves in a new context(among other goals).  I believe the separation resulted from false beliefs and spiritual corruption which has evolved on Earth.  Seth claims that the earliest humans were so in tune with their inner being and with nature that their consciousness actually had the flexibility to merge with the earth's different manifestations of consciousness.  These were humans not corrupted by false beliefs.  

Your way of thinking here would mean that Jesus did not choose to come here to guide humanity, but to indulge in the illusion of separation.  

We are just one type of consciousness here on earth.  Did all of the other consciousnesses on earth also choose to feel separation from source?  I'm willing to bet that they still experience that connection with source to some extent, and the reason is simply because they do not entertain false beliefs like we have learned to do which block us from that connection.  It just doesn't make much sense that we are here because we wanted to experience separation, but yet our goal is to shatter the illusion of separation.      

Btw, Seth also stresses the importance of letting go of false beliefs, breaking the illusion of separation from source, and living according to PUL.
 
Doc

Perhaps it is a coincidence that Jane died after twenty years of channeling Seth.  Maybe she would have died anyway.  Maybe Seth was a negative entity who decided that after 20 years of offering guidance and knowledge, it was time he killed her.  Maybe he unintentionally killed her by slowly draining her energy through the sessions.  I am not well read up on the circumstances of her death.. after I read The Way Towards Heath, which was dictated when she was in the hospital her final year, I will be more prepared to discuss this subject.

Sorry for coming off as pompous, but the fact is that most members here debating Seth with me have only read one or two of his books.  

This may be why you say Seth does not encourage his readers to pursue their own explorations, when in reality he clearly does, over and over again.  I have a stack of his books, I can find you some examples if you want.  It is true, Seth dictates the way he believes reality to be, but at the same time he stresses the important things that Monroe and others stress, exploring and finding your own answers and living according to love.

rondele wrote on Jan 6^th, 2009 at 9:55am:

<<This is rather obserd to think that more than 20 books of material were all just to trick us into believing one page>> Hi Dude- Yes, it's only one page.  But Seth's claim on that one page undermines all of Christianity.  If we accept that Jesus was never crucified, what does that mean in terms of His resurrection?? And once we doubt the resurrection, we might as well toss out the crux of Christianity. It's quite a page, wouldn't you agree? So again, either Seth didn't know that Jesus was crucified or he deliberately made up a story alleging that He wasn't. Either way it presents a pretty big problem about Seth's credibility. R

 Hi Rondele,
I use to think that perhaps Seth was a nonphysical consciousness with a not so friendly or spiritual agenda.   Now i'm not so sure about that, and wonder if perhaps Roberts was just "channeling" her own unconscious, repressed feelings, thoughts, energies.   Or, possibly just making it up to get well known, to make some money, etc.  

 I don't really know, the truth may be a little more complex, and might involve a blending of one or more of the 3.  

 I keep coming back to the lack of verifiable material contained in this rather large work.   Not just the lack of actually verified statements, but the fact that so little of it was specific enough to even begin to check it against material world knowns, and two of the more specific statements (about the bishop lifetime of Seth's) and the crucifixion of Yeshua, seem to be in major error.   So far, percentage wise, that's a pretty bad track record.  

 OOBD claims that Robert Butts writes that both Jane and Seth were tested clairvoyantly and got high scores.  At the time, i didn't know Butts was Jane's husband.   Can we really take his word for things?   Is he really a more objective source, and where are these tests and their scores so that I could look at them for ourselves?

 It's also interesting to note that in another video i watched of an interview with Roberts and Butts, that Butts says that they are not as interested in publishing the group sessions that took place, and that Butts wants to concentrate on his one on one sessions with Seth.  

  Hmm, could this perhaps be because in those group sessions, "Seth" is asked some more, very specific questions and his answers tend to be a little over generalized, vague, or off in some manner?   No doubt they surrounded themselves primarily with Seth and Robert fans, and stuff like that would get glossed over as happens in any kind of cultish or worshipful atmosphere, but Butts would certainly realize that the outside and skeptical world would not be so forgiving and blase about that.

 Anyways, i have no evidence of the latter, and it is just common sense speculation.  

Rondele

I'd like to think the idea of Christianity isn't based on a supernatural event such as a resurrection, but instead based on the teachings of Jesus.  The purpose of Christianity isn't to make you believe a man god was killed and brought back to life, but to provide a foundation for living a PUL-centered life.  Even if the resurrection didn't happen, it doesn't change the importance and truth of Jesus' teachings- which are the crux of Christianity.  It is as natural to doubt the resurrection as it is natural to doubt the validity of the being Seth.  

 You're missing some major points of mine.  My main premise was that on some major issues, the Seth philosophy and McKnights guidance info, was rather different.  You kept saying how alike they were.   I did just a little research and found out that they differ greatly on one major point beyond the Yeshua issue.  

 Also, you are characterizing both my beliefs about the physical and McKnight's guidance about same, as very one sided and one dimensional.  

 It's more complex than that, in our turning away from Source, the physical eventually was manifested temporarily.   The nonphysical patterns of the Earth were already there, because the Co-Creator of this World and this Universe created them.  Earths Soul was there, so to speak.  

 These patterns were in complete harmony originally.  Some unforseen and not entirely desirable things happened due to some Souls using their freewill in a nonconstructive manner.   They began to get involved with these pre-existing patters, and in their desires to be Gods SEPARATE from Source and PUL, they began to experiment with and unbalance this originally balanced and less physical/dense Creation.  

 This eventually led to a great stuckness in their own consciousness.  According to Cayce's source, in the early days of all this, mixed and grotesque forms of various animal, plant, etc. patterns developed from this "thoughtform playing" without thought of consequences.   Souls started to hook themsleves up to these thoughtforms and became increasingly stuck and overly attached to physical experiences.  

  The Co-Creator of this world, saw this mess and the increased stuckness and decided to do something about it, It developed a program to develop physical vehicles more suited to and in more resonation with the mental and spiritual aspects of Souls.  They, the Co-Creator with his various helpers (many of whom we would now call "E.T.'s"), genetically and energetically manipulated the primate species already existent because it was the animal pattern most akin to the outer, physical representation of our inner spiritual natures.

 Thus began humanity as we know it.   We are now collectively and individually trying to raise the vibrations of the physical again, so that we can all leave eventually as a group.  Some individuals leave before others and before the mass ascension cycles.   Some will remain stuck and will have to experience another system like our own.

 So, physicality is a double edged sword, it is both the manfiestation of our inner spiritual stuckness and lack of Source alignment, AND also the means and catalyst to want to get out of it because of its intense and suffering oriented nature.  

 Monroe was not a completed being when he had and related his experiences.   There IS much truth in his work, especially the latter, but even he knew error and had a lack of full and accurate knowledge.  I say that and yet i have great respect for the man and his pioneering work.

 Monroe was someone who spent much of his time being rather attached to the physical world and comforts of same.  Perhaps this skewed his latter spiritual interpretations somewhat?   People who knew him even in his latter years, say that he was still very much a "business man", and that Dude entails certain things..   It is not the Yeshua, Christ pattern of giving with NO thought of the little self.  

 When we get to that level within self, THEN do we begin to see the full undistorted by beliefs and preconceptions, picture.   As it stands, so many have so much invested in physicality and how "real" and necessary it is.  

 For now, it is necessary until we collectively transform it again to its original pattern as the Co-Creator meant it to be.    When we get to those levels, we will exit stage left out of this entire Universe and become likewise Co-Creators of other systems, dimensional paradigms, worlds, etc.  

It seems to me that most everyone on this thread is applying one set of guidelines to Dude's reasoning and another to their own. If it's a scientific discussion then let's look at the Nativity and the Crucifiction in those terms too and channeling in general. We're all in a different place. I can't get home from looking at someone else's map from where they are. Some great points have been brought up here, but now it seems like the science is something I would want to hear from both sides if it's a science argument--not that I think it is necessarily. I will read Seth because of this discussion. I have read ACIM and I found it to be more palatable than much of the Bible and even the gnostic gospels: Meaning it makes more sense to me and I disagree with it not being from a place of love, however I don't conform to it on all levels. What happened to those people after they wrote it is irrelevant unless Jesus' "punishment" for his words was to be crucified. There's great wisdom on this board and you all are great, but I felt I had to chime in-- No offense meant to anyone.

Beau

Hi Justin-

Like Doc, I also was highly impressed the first time I read Seth Speaks.  I thought I found the Holy Grail!  It all seemed so impressive.  

But that was way back in the late 1970s or early 80s.  The Seth material remains the same, but I guess it's me who has changed.

For one thing, I've come to distrust any information that is supposedly channeled from a deceased entity.  Over the years, the more I've read from these sources, the more contradictions I come across.  You would think that highly evolved entities would be consistent at least on the major things.  As I've said before, Seth says earth is a school, but Elias says we are not here to learn, only to "experience."

And then we have ACIM, which says everything we see and experience is just an illusion.

At some point, and maybe it goes along with growing older, we need to step back and reassess this stuff.  What appeals to us at 25 or 35 might not have the same appeal when we are 55 or 65.  

For myself, I am far more critical and skeptical today than I was 30 years ago.  I just don't jump into what the latest new age guru says as I once did.

Ok, that's me, and who knows, maybe I am just more skeptical than most people and maybe that's to my disadvantage.  Maybe by being skeptical I turn off my own ability to "tune in" so to speak.  I guess the trick is to become open minded while at the same time having a mechanism to catch the undesirable things.  Sort of like what the oil filter does to avoid contaminating the engine.

On another issue, I also wonder, if Seth really is a highly evolved entity whose mission is to enlighten us, why is it that other people besides Jane don't also access him??  What is so special or unique about Jane that rules out the rest of us from contacting him?

Btw, other channelers have claimed they too have contacted Jesus just as Helen Schucman did. Only problem is, the Jesus they contacted does not say the same things that Helen's version does.

Doc's point about the Ouija board is well taken.  There was a time when I played around with it. No more.  Just because a source is from the other side doesn't mean that it's benign or well intentioned.  I imagine there's just as much deception in the afterlife as there is in this one.

R

 Note that Mr. Monroe was a still in physical being, and that Rosiland's guidance energies were rather far removed from same (one of the very reasons none of them wanted to give any names, for it would tend to pull them into such earthly energies).   Perhaps that is one of the reasons of the difference in interpretation?  It can be hard to be completely objective when you are very close and emotionally involved with something.  

 I quite enjoy physical life Dude, but i never forget that it is ultimately an illusion and one that i need to transcend by being as loving and non material oriented as i can.  It is not easy to break such patterns while still focused in same, and probably why there aren't many more Yeshua types running around in this world.  

 It seems you are blinding yourself to Roberts/Seth's lack of credibility because you are emotionally invested in the material.   Your Greater self perhaps led you to it initially because it realized that some concepts in same might help to expand certain mental aspects, however maybe it didn't mean for you to get so attached to it?  

 Have you tried that experiment yet?   If you turned out to be very off about Yeshua according to your own experiences as you have admitted, could it not be that you are off about Seth/Roberts too?

Thanks for the Reply, Dude and others.

Dude,  I have seen many instances where Seth's words say that we must look for ourselves.  But the discourse is then followed by, these definitive statements about how things are laid out in the physical and mental planes.  This combined with the dismissal of other accounts of history, made me question how much we were truly meant to explore those issues that Seth felt were cut and dry (to his reckoning).  

If you say "explore for yourselves," but then dismiss others as being inaccurate, the bells and whistles go off for me.  That along with this so called reincarnation of Oscar Wilde, or the lack of true historical facts that we could check through the discourse, made me question why he would dwell on earthly history at all.

As I mentioned, many sources (which I could quote), talk of a spiritual dissociation from the physical plane after death.  If Seth were done with incarnations, certain concepts and notions we have here in the physical would fade from his understanding, since there would not be a spiritual equivalent.  Facts, figures and the like tend to be much more associated with entities close to the earth plane in focus levels 22, 23, etc.  

So I can't help but wonder.  Either way, I keep my volume of Seth Speaks and JR's other works to look at from time to time, so I enjoy the consistency of the the metaphysics as much as the next guy.

M

Say you had a professor who told you that Abraham Lincoln wasn't assasinated. You looked into his reason for believing this, and found that he was mistaken. Would you consider him to be a trustworthy professor, or a man who gets carried away with his theories? Jane Roberts/Seth didn't simply say Jesus wasn't crucified and leave it at that. Jane Roberts/Seth had a very detailed and faulty explanation as to why Jesus supposedly wasn't crucified. More than a little confusion is involved.

As I've written before, because Jane Roberts/Seth chose to speak of Jesus in an inaccurate way, I'm not interested. I figure I gain much more by allowing myself to be a person who has love and respect for beings such as Jesus, than I would by reading material from a source that purposely misrepresents him. It isn't about being open minded. It is about opening your heart to having reverence and respect for a being such as Christ, and not allowing sources to get away with misrepresenting him.

Regarding it not making sense that over twenty books served the purpose of undermining Jesus, I believe it was more of a matter of Jane Roberts and her husband serving themselves. Even if a misleading entity was involved, it wouln't be necessary for this entity to say false things about Jesus for twenty volumes, in order for it to accomplish its mission. Twenty volumes would serve the purpose of misinforming and brainwashing people in other ways. If a person reads this much material from one source, he or she is bound to get braiwashed eventually.

Regarding Dude knowing better than the rest of us because he has read more Seth books, would it be fair to say that a fundamentalist knows more about Christ's teachings than one of us, because a fundamentalist has studied the subject more fervently? It is certainly possible that a person gave up on Seth early on, because he or she was able to see what Seth is about early on. Should a person be required to read numerous books about a source he (or she) found to be questionable early on, so some day down the road he can say that he read numerous books by this false source?

When it comes to Rosalind Mcknight's book contending that this World is the result of a mistake, Justin and I don't agree with this conclusion.  An oversoul/disk incarnates small portions of itself into this World, while the rest of it remains in the spirit World. It is more of a matter of what it needs to learn, than getting stuck. I believe too much thought was put into creating life in this World, for it to be a big mistake.  It is important to remember that from an oversoul's viewpoint all incarnations happen at the same time. Therefore, how much can getting stuck be a factor?

None taken Beau, for me, this is not "about me", but about the misrepresentation of a great spiritual teacher and some main purposes of his life.  

 I'm not particularly attached to what other people do or don't believe.  I see things i greatly or mildly disagree with all the time in real life and on boards like these but i rarely disagree or debate anymore.  Certainly not so strongly as now.

 But when a so called channeled source misrepresents such a pure, loving, and helpful pattern that i know from my experiences was the real deal all the way through, then do i stand up and speak out.  

 Rondele made some very good points about Seth, Yeshua, and that if you get people to believe only one major point about his life was off, then its not so much a stretch to try to change their minds about other aspects.  

 Yes, one of the important things about Yeshua was that he was loving and taught love, BUT any real teachers and guide types that have come to Earth have been similar in that general manner.  Many major Religions teach compassion or love in some form.  

 But it was his specific example, and his specific teachings which arose out of same, which are what most important and central to the whole thing.  

 He transcended physical death, for physicality and limitations connected to same are ultimately illusions and if one is so PUL attuned, so pure and loving as He is, then they too will likewise transcend all illusions even while still focused in physicality.  That's his promise to us, if we but follow in his ways of living and being.  

 This what make Yeshua unique amongst all public spiritual teachers.  He walked the walk to the nth degree and proved it to the people of his times by showing up again after being killed, in a "body" with both physical and completely non physical attributes.  People who knew him, and those who knew those who knew him, left accounts of this.

 Because of the resurrection the crucifixion is essential in all this.   Someone once asked Cayce in trance how do we tell and know that we can trust say a channeled or mediumistic source.   They were told to ask them to recognize the birth, teachings, life, death and ressurrection of Christ.  If they answered in the no about any one of these, it would be best to just leave this source be.  

 Here we have such a one, and one which besides is not very credible from a holistic reasoning.  Limiting and false beliefs have a tendency to keep one stuck in some aspect of self.   These need to be let go of, if one wants to fully merge with Source again.  

Justin

I now have a better understanding of what you were saying.  I still disagree, but there's nothing wrong with that, what works for me works for me and what works for you works for you.  

I fully realize the issues regarding Seth's credibility.  I do not feel I am overly attached, however.  You heard her speak as Seth and thought, she must be faking it, her voice is over exaggerated.  I heard her speak as Seth and thought, thats interesting.  I wonder why she sounds like that.  I am not jumping to any conclusions because I really don't know the answers.  Maybe she is faking it.  Maybe she isn't.  I am simply reading this material and taking what I need from it.  This is what I do with all the sources I read.  

If Monroe said he travelled to the past and saw that the crucifixion was as Seth said, many people would probably discredit his entire work just as they are doing here with Seth.  This does not mean Monroe is dishonest, it does not necessarily mean he is wrong, and it certainly doesn't mean the rest of his work is bogus.  

I have already stated my reasons for giving Seth credibility, and these reasons are undeniable.  I am left believing that Seth had a good grasp on the nature of reality and worthy motives, although he was not a perfect being, and having to communicate through Roberts, mistakes have obviously been made in the material.

I wouldn't say I am too emotionally invested in this material.  I am emotionally invested in the search for greater knowledge.  I feel I see the material quite objectively, for I have gained knowledge and read things that others have obviously missed, and yet its all there in black and white for anyone to see.  

 Hi Albert,

Neither one of us are completed beings in the flesh, and hence neither one of us knows the full, undistorted truth in this.  Our very involvement in physicality tends to limit and subjectify our perceptions about this very issue and question.

 Now, i have a lot of respect and trust in you and in your connections to your guidance.  But i have even more respect for and trust in Rosiland and her guidance connections.  

 Also, as i've mentioned before, both Rosiland's and Cayce's guidance seems to mostly agree on this whole subject, except that Rosiland's guides were more clear about it.  

   I also have my own intuitions, guidance, and experiences to go by, which match up more to what Rosiland and Cayce's guidance seem to say.  

 Also, as i've explained before, i would not use the term "mistake", more like an experiment, which while certain choices slowed down the whole thing, it all eventually will reach the same destination so it's not that much of a mistake.  

 But what i emphasize, what Cayce's guidance emphasizes, and Rosiland's seems to support as well, is that IT WASN'T EVER NECESSARY TO BEGIN WITH.   It was just due to freewill and the separating from Source in Consciousness.  

 Since that initial occurance, many Light Beings have been involved with this World, and have helped to shape it as much as they can.  Perhaps this is why you sense what you sense, but can't seem to integrate the complexity and relativity of the actual situation?  Maybe you, like most of us, also have belief system blockage?  

 I don't see such belief system blockage with Rosie's guides, and they came through very clearly in her.    Until i get different info, i will side with Rosiland, Cayce, and my own intuitions on the matter.  

I have come to a conclusion.  We could debate this topic for our entire lives.  I understand that not everyone here agrees with the Seth material.  This is fine.  I cannot see myself putting any more energy into this debate, as it is taking away from where my energy should be going. Everyone has their own unique way of finding the truth.  If you do not trust a source, then that is your choice and I respect that.  No ones beliefs are ever really changed from these debates anyway, although they can introduce ideas which can be explored when the individual is ready.  I realize Seth does not offer absolute truth, but this does not mean I cannot benefit from his work.  

 Thank you for hearing and really listening to me OOBD.  The last thing i will say about this is...wait..cough cough experiment..cough cough.   :D ;)

 It might not seem that apparent on the surface of things, but I have a lot of respect for you.  

I was wondering what I would read after I finish Bruce's 4th book. Thanks to this thread I have a lot to choose from--thanks to all.

Justin:

Perhaps it suffices to say that I believe that this World is a way of learning that spirits happen to get caught up in for a while. Many choose to do so even though they know it is a prolonged way of learning. Because they expect to eventually rejoin their higher self, they didn't make a mistake. Perhaps what Rosalind's guides said can be considered in this context.

Many souls don't choose such a way of learning. The souls that don't choose our way of learning benefit from our travails. Perhaps by enjoying the Loosh we create.

I believe something is added to source when we take part in the human learning experience. It provides souls with a way to develop their uniqueness, and to learn to make use of the creative aspect of their being in a wise and loving way.

Many sources say that we incarnate into this World in order to learn about love. This doesn't mean that love wasn't available before this World was created.  It is just that this World provides a unique way to learn about love. Unknown possibilities about love are discovered. For example, how can you know about the beauty of compassion, if a situation never existed where it was needed? How can you know about the value of showing somebody affection, if the need of being shown affection never existed? How can you fully understand about grattitude and appreciation, if you don't fully understand the beauty of your situation? Love is more than a feeling, it is a way of understanding that has various attributes. Contrast often plays the role of enabling us to understand something completely.

I've read little of Cayce, but I doubt he was beyond making mistakes. For example, his interpretation of the book of Revelations really seems to be off the mark. When John spoke of things such as seven churches he did not have seven chakras in mind.

In the end so much good comes from incarnating in this World, I believe it is a mistake to think of it as a mistake.

Beau:

I don't know what you've read. Perhaps Robert Monroe's Ultimate Journey. Read a bunch near death experiences. More than anything, rely on yourself. Have you made contact with your higher self/spirit guidance?



Beau wrote on Jan 6^th, 2009 at 2:51pm:

I was wondering what I would read after I finish Bruce's 4th book. Thanks to this thread I have a lot to choose from--thanks to all.

I have only read Monroe's first book and a little bit of the second. I want to go back and read the second one for real but I don't own it anymore so I gotta get it I guess.

I have made contact with a fraction of my higher self, but sometimes it has come when I am in what we bipolars call a manic state. See the problem with that is not that I don't trust the source when I'm level headed, but I definitely don't trust it when I'm in a depressed state. So I spend months coming to terms with what I learned from before and then getting over the fears that come about from trying to understand the information. It's kind of weird, but that's my story and I'm sticking to it.  ;)

 Hi Beau,

 I had a similar thought as Albert/Recoverer.  Even if I believed Seth was a credible and helpful source, I would still say that it's more important and fulfilling to go within for your own answers.  

  And even in my debating with OOBD, i told him not to take my word and beliefs for it, but that it would be helpful to do deep within to get his answers.  

 This is what Bruces work is all about btw, and especially his last book.  It seems he doesn't want his info to just become another belief system, but more an inspiration to explore for oneself.  And he gives a pretty good set of tools and frame of reference to work from.  

 So why not go within instead?  

I agree completely about going within, Justin. There is no substitute. I am pretty discerning, but sometimes not immediately. Because I like to let it gestate. Even though I am a seeker I found Religelous very enlightening--not to start up a new discussion or anything. Thanks for your advice sir.

beau