http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?3,21069,page=2

Ironic though, the biggest cult on earth is considered to be the definition of normal. 'You're a body, this is all there is, oh, and possibly your brand of hollow heaven'. Now, that's a Lord who demands obedience and worship. Yeah, yeah. Merry yule. :)

I think that what is important is to explore things for yourself, examine the truths in your life, and not be a blind follower of any guru, be it conventional religion or Abraham-Hicks wackos.  I think Cervantes said in Don Quixote something like "there is no book or text so bad that there is not something good to be found in it."  This could be said about the Abraham-Hicks books/sessions or information.  But that doesn't mean one should blindly follow all the guidance. 

There are certain laws, such as the law of attraction which can be verified by any of us, through deep introspection and examination of our own lives.  Esther Hicks and Hubby teach this, but charge a lot, and get blind followers because she claims to be channeling.  What is it about channelers?  Why do the masses believe that an alleged (and I do mean alleged) noncorporeal being somehow has a better bead on what the big picture is than we do?  Why are Hicks-Abraham, Seth and Ramtha doted on as if they have a superior spirituality?   If spirituality is truly judged by how close we are to PUL - love of others and God, then I see no reason to look to a channeler for information.  There are plenty of loving people and texts out there.

I believe that many of these channelers take morsels of truth, and use it for profit or distort it.  Imagine telling a woman who had lost three babies that she must have attracted that misery into her life somehow!  Ridiculous.  While the law of attraction explains much, any thinking person will know there are limits.  A tsunami comes in South East Asia and kills 230,000 people all at once.  The Abraham Hicks crowd might say that those who died attracted death or misfortune into their lives.  But a more realistic view is that apart from the law of attraction and karma is a law of random energy; that is that in the physical world, there are also random events that occur that ripple with and interact with our lives and energies - whether we want them to or not.  Life is not completely scripted.  When 66,000 people were obliterated at Hiroshima, or tens of millions died during WWII, one can not glibly apply it all to karma or the law of attraction. 

Clearly there are random energies, disasters and catastrophes that act separately from our intentions. 


Matthew

I should also add that with all of those who talk about the law of attraction and riches, you very rarely here them talk about love - love of our fellow beings and God.  So there is a glaring hole in "The Secret."  The gurus explain the law of attraction -  essentially saying that thought creates reality - and then tell people "go out and make money, be successful, be a winner!"

Yet they only get half the picture.  Thought does create reality.  You can attract what you want into your life, good or bad.  But what does that say about what we really are?  We are spirit, manifest in flesh.  Spirit creates circumstance.  But we are meant to learn that the foundation of our being is love.   For many on this board, this has been the true quest for spirituality. 

If one tries to be more loving, and acts out of love, one tends to act more selflessly, or gradually lose the drive of the ego.  This is almost always missing from the talk of the gurus involved with "The Secret." 

Ok, you CAN apply intent for riches, fame, success - but now what are you going to do knowing this?  Knowing that we are more than our physical bodies, and that love is the true foundation of our spiritual being, how are you going to express this love, and nurture it?

Love doesn't seem to factor into the equation of those get-rich-with-the-law-of-attraction people.


Matthew

Matthew 7:7

Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

____________________

Isn't that the "Law of Attraction" in another form?

Isn't the implication of Matthew 7:7 that if it manifests in your life you somehow requested it?

Hi Lucy,

Yes, I think that quote and others about intent/faith found in the NT is spot on.  For me, my interpretation is not that every specific minute detail has been asked for on some level.   Only our general state of being. 

There are too many interactions with the energies of others, and random earth events (tsunamis, fires, etc.).  The idea that everything is pre-planned by us before we live would take away the fun and exploration of being incarnate here on earth.  So, no, for me, I don't believe that everything in our lives comes by the law of attraction - just many things, and our general state.

I think it is horrendous to say that if one is ill or loses three pregnancies, she must have "asked for it" subconsciously.  Or that a rape victim must have been a rapist or needed to go through that.  The law of attraction is in effect, but it doesn't take into account our interactions with others, and their own intent and energies. 

Matthew

I agree with what Matthew wrote.  Kudos to what Crevantes said.

I watched half of the secret and had to stop, partly because they quoted some people out of context and partly because a couple of the examples they provided didn't add up. For example, a lady wasn't happy with the people she worked with, she changed her thoughts, and supposedly as a result everybody she worked with left her department. Give me a break!

What if a kid in the ghetto keeps thinking he'll get the pony he wants, will he get it?

It troubles me that affirmation based teachings are presented as if they are spiritual, yet so often they are about becoming wealthy.  I watched Larry King one night when he had people from the secret, he spoke to one of the authors at a seminar (I can't remember his name), and a person called in and asked why this man charges over $900 for a seminar. The man answered with a fake smile that anything worth having is worth paying for.

Why is it that so many of the people who know the secret to becoming rich become rich by teaching the way to other people?

Why is that some so-called spiritual teachings are made available only to people who can pay an overly expensive price?

Do the millions of people who are forced to be prostitutes (including children) attract such a fate or are they victims of the people who entrap them?

If one reads the entire thread of the link I provided one will see how some people become brainwashed by channeled sources. How can a person create with true freedom, if he or she is brainwashed by somebody else's way of thinking?

I don't believe Jesus had some get rich plan in mind. I believe it would be more accurate to say that if you open your mind and heart to God's love and light, you'll be provided accordingly.



Lucy wrote on Dec 30^th, 2010 at 3:49am:

Isn't the implication of Matthew 7:7 that if it manifests in your life you somehow requested it?

Regarding channeling, I've watched some of them on youtube, and it puzzles me why they tend to speak in such an odd way. Why wouldn't channeled beings speak like normal people?

Quote:

if you open your mind and heart to God's love and light, you'll be provided accordingly.

Does that explain the difference between Eckhart Tolle and James Oroc?

There are just so many facets to this topic and I don't want to see it reduced to a diatribe against cults.

For me, one problem to discussing this is that I seem to want a higher-level explanation of what's going on than many others do. I always think there is some meta-level from which I can view all this and get a better picture leading to a deeper understanding.

Matthew-

Excellent post. 

There is so much fraud and so many scams out there, and for most of us they are all very transparent. 

What mystifies me, however, is the mindset of those who buy into them.  I suspect there are many reasons, probably mostly among people who are looking for a way out of a rough time they are having with their own lives.

In today's Washington Post, there is an article about a woman who is convinced the rapture will take place on May 21 of this year, followed by the earth's destruction on October 21.  Her website http://www.wecanknow.com seems articulate enough, but I'd love to see a psychiatric profile of her.  I hope the Post does a follow-up with her on May 22.

As Albert has noted many times, these so-called gurus are almost always motivated by money and sex.  And there is never a shortage of people willing to give them both.

R

Lucy:

I don't know who James Oroc is.

Regarding Tolle, he might have some good things to say, but I don't believe he is enlightened (whatever that means) as he claims.

If there is such a thing as an enlightened person, I doubt that he (or she) would present himself as some sort of authority figure by claiming to be enlightened. There are too many people who have left their discrimination to a supposed enlightened one, because according to their misled way of thinking, how could an enlightened person possibly be wrong? People conclude this even when a supposed enlightened one says something that is contrary to what their own experience, intuition, heart, intelligence and discrimination tell them.

Also, because many people have been dishonest about being enlightened and have used such a claim to benefit themselves, anybody who truly knew something would do his best to distance himself from all the frauds.

The fact of how Tolle is so obsessed with ACIM shows me that his discrimination is lacking. I figure that a person who is supposedly enlightened would be more discerning.



Lucy wrote on Jan 1^st, 2011 at 3:56am:

Quote: if you open your mind and heart to God's love and light, you'll be provided accordingly. Does that explain the difference between Eckhart Tolle and James Oroc?

Lucy,

"For me, one problem to discussing this is that I seem to want a higher-level explanation of what's going on than many others do. I always think there is some meta-level from which I can view all this and get a better picture leading to a deeper understanding."

A tip is focus 27/the park/reception area and then the intent to seek knowledge about specifics about life on earth. Why not beyond f27, sure, but still lots of info pertaining to familiar questions and other interesting topics on f27.

Rondele,

"http://www.wecanknow.com"
"I hope the Post does a follow-up with her on May 22."

Judgement day delayed, or still under construction? - See a bible quote that says a day was appointed by old beardie to judge the world. That will be the day. I predict that business as usual will change at some point. Don't have the exact date, but.. probably a monday at around 07.00, just in time for the alarm clock not to ring, and work no more.

Perhaps the end is only for those who hold the belief that the end of the world is happening...
The rest of us will have to just carry on with our own knowns and our own beliefs. But if we don't believe it, and it does end, will we even know it? Or will we just continue on existing as we always have in some area of 23? (Will we hear that tree in the forest falling then?) Why some are so afraid I just don't understand. There is no real death. There is no end to our experience. Your friends and family's will continue existing and you will continue to experience the love with them. Whats the problem? 2012, end of the world.. bring it on. It time to quit living in fear. There is more control over other,s and more money being made off of the fear of 2012, that if it was directed towards love and good deed,s a large amount of good could be done. If we all took one dollar, every day....just one dollar...and used it towards good and loving help, imagine what we could accomplish. (I wonder if we are really deserving of our existence and learning experience here?)   

I have questions, but I don't feel they can be explored with a goal to really figure out what is going on, when there is underlying animosity towards some of the characters. Sometimes I just want to say, "Hmm this data looks kinda weird, what does that mean?" without having to deal with any preconceived ideas.

So I'm not sure what the motive really was in posting the original link and even if I would like ot have a thoughtful conversation full of questions, to try to get a better perspective, I'm not sure that is possible.

Lucy,

"I have questions, but I don't feel they can be explored with a goal to really figure out what is going on, when there is underlying animosity towards some of the characters."

Animosity - violent hatred leading to active opposition; active enmity; energetic dislike. That's not what I am seeing, more like distrust. In that discernment or distrust also lies an opportunity to get to know the "law" of allowance. Not sure if that has got a material spin yet, but a very interesting one.

Volu

Yes in this thread perhaps 'animosity' is a bit strong, but over time I do not think it is incorrect. But for discussion's sake I will happily go with "distrust." It is as good a place to start a discussion. And I will take your point because I like the warp and woof of your quote. Not sure what you mean by "material spin"  :)   or by law of allowance. Is law of allowance like "do unto others"?

BTW, why does this topic interest you?

Hi Lucy,

"Not sure what you mean by 'material spin' :) or by law of allowance. Is law of allowance like 'do unto others'?"

I skimmed through 'the secret' video but found it a bit dull and the impression was that it focused too much on attraction as in attracting material things/money. So, a concept given a material spin.

My current understanding is that a part of "law" of allowance is about not imposing your will onto others, or trying to save others, even though you believe or KNOW what's better or best for others. Sounds simple and obvious, but find there are lots of subtle nuances to it. And what's the sweet spot? In "real life" I'm often too soft and careful to weigh my words. On this board, without physical proximity, maybe I need to get better at recognizing that sometimes the time might very well be perfect not to say/write something. Many subtleties to this also than the obvious.

"BTW, why does this topic interest you?"

I'm attracted to it because I want to evolve, grow and improve spiritually by gaining a deeper understanding of it, and hopefully put that into action by doing. Different perspectives makes the picture bigger.

The thoughts presented so far come up often enough for me to think that they are of continual importance to people. Yet I see so many thoughts and points presented so far as to feel that the balls of yarn have become unwound and so totally tangled that I will never get them all straightened out. Certainly not in just a few posts.

I wish I were able to look at all the ideas and reduce things to a few basic premises and then derive everything from that. It doesn't work, I don't know why not. That doesn't stop me from trying.

I think I recall that recoverer does not like gurus and also defnes gurus rather loosely. So I think the video was posted as a place to start a put-down of some of these movements. I can't figure out how to have a discussion about underlying principles if I am to worry if the Hicks are putting one over on people, though that may be a valid question.

So as part of a disclaimer, I will admit up front that Seth really has had a major impact on me. It is because it was in a book and it introduced me to ideas I had never paid attention to before. Reincarnation? out of body? mediumship? on and on. You have to put that in context. I grew up in a small town going to (protestant ) church and sort of following the straight and narrow (partly because my parents were alcoholics ..but then now I think half the town was!..and I was trying to fix things by 'being good'). Analytical and intellectual enough to live in my ideas, yeah college shook things up! but by grad school I was in a rut again. The only thing mystical I could ever connect to was William Blake; not into drugs. I was feeling that life had no purpose. And then the first Seth book fell into my lap. Whole new worlds opened up. I was more open to reading Monroe's first book because I had read Seth first. After a long while I realized it didn't fix alot of things, but my whole perspective was changed by then. It's complex. But I think of Seth as an old friend. It pains me when someone mocks that whole thing. Jane and Robert Butts did not appear to get rich off that. There are things about that that still intrigue me. I am still interested in discussing the validity of the concepts. Maybe that just means I like discussing metaphysics. Wish I knew what Bob Monroe thought of his visit with Jane/Seth. Is the material still archived at Yale?

I don't think selling books makes someone a guru. If it did, J.K. Rowling would be at the top of the list. After all, what kind of nutty people take their children to a bookstore at midnight for a book release? :)

"I wish I were able to look at all the ideas and reduce things to a few basic premises and then derive everything from that. It doesn't work, I don't know why not. That doesn't stop me from trying."

1. One can find gems in the strangest places. One may searching behind the same stone as others but yet find completely different gems. Just because you're done looking behind the stone(s) doesn't forbid others to look.

2. If one perceive something as weeds - what's the line between telling you about it, or trying to convince you about it?`

3. Somebody calls something weeds - not you weeds, or your experiences weeds. It's their view of the issue at hand, and has nothing to do with you personally.

?

Volu points to the line most of are always figuring out how to walk, that is, how to express what we have experienced or believe or think in a way that is persuasive, or at least provocative, but not doctrinaire and oppressive.  In other words, how to start and keep a discussion going and avoid lapsing into a diatribe and, essentially, yelling at our forum-mates as if they were idiots for not seeing things as we do.

Lucy I, too, stumbled upon Seth way back when at a time when I needed just that to open my mind to new ways of thinking about things.  And I share your sadness about the mocking of Seth, though I don't have the time or energy to revisit those works to either defend Seth or change my perhaps nostalgic view.  Seth seems sort of like the raggedy teddy bear that I loved so dearly when a teddy bear was what I needed, even though I no longer know just what a teddy bear is all about. 

Well when this topic comes up it seems tome there are two divergent questions.

Is the teacher on the up-and-up?

Is the teaching valid? 


The two questions aren't equivalent.

I like Seth as a comforting teddy bear too.

I don't know what the phenomenon of mediumship represents. But we have such a rudimentary intellectual grasp of what conciousness is anyway; how can we say what mediumship is?

A healer was the first person who suggested looking at the Abraham-Hicks stuff. She said it was sort of like Seth. This was in the early days of the web and I recall looking it up. But I had other things ot occupy my time then so I let it go. I came back to it later, even got a book. I went to their site and found they would be in town on a particular date. I had a little extra cash and more amazingly some free time so I signed up for one of the days. I was really curious.

Wow. What a production. I was amazed to go into the lobby of the hotel and see how many people were checking attendees in, and how much stuff there was for sale! Yeah that looked a little strange to me. So I found a seat and waited. Finally they started. To a packed audience I might add. Jerry started and warmed the audience up. Then Esther came. She really didn't talk or anything. She just did the trance thing. "Hi-goodbye" I think she said. "Abraham" talked for a good while. More of the same as is in the books. Then we broke for lunch. That was part of the package. The people at my table were alll interesting and had different levels of interest and knowledge and whatever. At least here was a group of people who wanted to talk openly about this sort of phenomena. Then after lunch I think we had two shorter sessions of "Abraham." There was a question and answer period. That sort of bothered me as when I heard the questions I began to wonder if at least one was a plant. The guy missed the morning and shows up in the PM and has a question and gets chosen to ask it? I don't recall the question but it seemed odd. Then finally it was over (I don't like to sit for long periods so I was glad). at breaks and afterwards there was lots of merchandising. That disappointed me but I did note that people were buying of their own free will, nobody forced them.

But one thing that has bothered me a lot was something that happened afterwards. The line to the facilities was very long and so I wandered off in another direction looking for more. That's not interesting except to point out that I wasn't looking for Esther. I thought Jerry had said she would be available for questions afterwards and that she was in the main event hall. So I walked across the lobby and down another hall. Suddenly Esther, with Jerry not far behind, came out of a door or entranceway. being a friendly sort I smiled and said hi. The part that shocked me was the look on Esther's face when she saw me. She looked positively alarmed for a second, then said hi, looked down and kept walking. Jerry came up and made some inane prattle which I interpeted as his keeping me from talking to her, and we kept moving forward, they to the elevator and me to the other line. I was shocked at the lack of interest in even being pleasant with me. It may sound silly, but that feeling of her pulling back has bothered me ever since.

I haven't read about mediumship in a long time. When it was popular before in the late 1800's/early 1900's? people did ask questions like, why is the voice so changed and who is this other entity? I've been tryong to recall where I read about it. I also tried to find someone else who experiences this and ask them how Esther could do this for so many hours a day and so often on the road. But I don't know anyone to ask.

It was hard to not notice how much many of the crowd were buoyed up by this day's experience. I heard one woman say she came for both sessions and was staying in the hotel. She was from CT and the Hicks go to CT so I don't know why someone would pay to come up to MA for another weekend of this. But it is her money and her experience. It is interesting how this thing satisfies a real need in many people. It is sort of amazing actually.

But it still didn't answer a question primary to me:

Does "Ask and it shall be given" really work?

Because I'm not getting what I think is a one-to-one correlation with that between what I think I am asking for and what manifests in my life.

Lucy wrote on Jan 4^th, 2011 at 8:25am:

But it still didn't answer a question primary to me: Does "Ask and it shall be given" really work?

Both when I've seen John Edwards and Ambres on TV I've noticed that they don't give any info that isn't already known, or at least very little info, except for things gone missing, like jewelry or lost keys.

I've heard one point about trans-mediums, and that's that they never reveal any info which isn't already publicly known somewhere else. They don't reveal who killed Kennedy or similar stuff. So my take on it is that we don't get any info other than that we already can achieve somewhere else, most of the time.

Lucy said:
"But it still didn't answer a question primary to me: Does "Ask and it shall be given" really work?
Because I'm not getting what I think is a one-to-one correlation with that between what I think I am asking for and what manifests in my life. "

I think that the law of attraction at its basic essence is just this; that our deepest thought that is tied in our gut to belief with conviction, tends to alter probabilities in our lives and manifest what we ask for.  But what we is for is not the whimsical passing wishes of our conscious mind.  So if I try to use the law of attraction to get out of a financial rut, finding myself broke, I can't simply "wish to be rich."  That is not how it works, and why so many of us fail.  We have to use our subconscious mind to expect the situation to change.  For some, this is done by the use of imagery; we picture the desired end, the goal while meditating.  We actually see ourselves and our loved ones in our mind's eye rejoicing and"feel" the feelings of joy, before the outcome has been reached.  Spiritual healers talk about feeling this to heal others.  To "see it as already done."  This is a difficult concept, but very effective.  If you deeply doubt what you are doing as you invoke the law of attraction, you are bound to fail.  This is because your subconscious acts most strongly on your thoughts tied into true belief or conviction. 

How do you banish doubt then to manifest your goals in your life?  You don't have to banish doubt completely.  But when you are relaxed, when you meditate you must state intention without doubt, as if it were accomplished.  You should give thanks for the desired outcome before it has occurred and cultivate that feeling of knowing or fulfillment to impress on your subconscious. 

My understanding is that the subconscious mind is like a reactive template that is connected to God and the universe.  It doesn't make decisions, but acts upon thoughts bound to strong beliefs.  If you send it conflicting beliefs, you confuse the subconscious and lose your goal. 

Matthew

I agree with what Doc has said here. This is the basis for deep meditation, and focusing with image and feeling on 'being' what you intend to be while in this state. Upon repetition, your subconscious mind will accept new beliefs, as you are willing. Your 'outer' world may not 'appear' to be manifesting, but over time it will. It also may take your 'outer mind' a while to accept the new you, and to take on the new behaviors which support your new life. At least, this is what I believe. Awareness is most important. Anything which disturbs your awareness affects the outcome, such as certain habits, physical debilitation, 'heavy' persons in your environment, etc. What I believe is that you are always heading in a certain direction, and it is up to you to support yourself in heading towards your most positive dreams, and to believe that you deserve them. 

Quote:

Regarding channeling, I've watched some of them on youtube, and it puzzles me why they tend to speak in such an odd way. Why wouldn't channeled beings speak like normal people?

I can't recall or find where I've seen discussions on this, but others have asked this question. I guess no one found a good answer.

One place I looked was in psychologist Lawrence LeShan's work The Medium the Mystic and the Physicist. Before he turned his attention to folks with cancer, he studied alternate realities and "psychic healing," and apparently worked a good bit with Eileen Garrett. I agree with the Wiki folks that this article is lacking, the Wiki article does give an overview of Garrett and I think it is interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eileen_J._Garrett

She "developed" (?) a trance personality called Uvani, and LeShan included an appendix in the aforementioned book called "When is Uvani?" in which he explores the question of whether Uvani, who is clearly not a structural entity, might be some kind of functional entity. The book was written in 1966 so it seems a little archaic now, but I think LeShan was sincere and honest in his writings on Garrett/Uvani.

But whether or not LeShan would take Esther/Abraham as seriously as he did Eileen Garrett is another question. I don't know how what went on with Eileen Garrett compares to what went on with Jane Roberts or what goes on with Esther Hicks.

With Seth, I do not try to equate the message with the messenger and I think the ideas are interesting.

The ideas with Hicks are things I've heard before, occasionally presented from a new angle, but I wonder if sometimes folks confuse the messenger and the message there. But we live in a celebrity-based culture so I'm not surprised people go for celebrity status rather than for ..depth of content or whatever you want to call it. I don't think Jane Roberts was interested in celebrity status and she herself expressed surprise and questioning about some of the ideas Seth spoke about.

The idea I have come across regarding why channels speak differently when in trance is because the being who is communicating through the channel is actually controlling their vocal chords and hence will not use those muscles in the same way as the channel normally does.  Whether there is any merit to this theory is beyond me. 

In some cases it seems like theatrics that have the intent of fooling people.


I Am Dude wrote on Jan 8^th, 2011 at 2:58pm:

The idea I have come across regarding why channels speak differently when in trance is because the being who is communicating through the channel is actually controlling their vocal chords and hence will not use those muscles in the same way as the channel normally does.  Whether there is any merit to this theory is beyond me.

Quote:

In some cases it seems like theatrics that have the intent of fooling people.

Yes, that's true. And one frustrating thing is that people have been making that point and trying to answer it "scientifically" for at least 100 years, and we still don't have a definitive answer.

And another problem is that everything else we talk about here can be subjected to the same criticism, and has been , and is. Undoubtedly there are people who make the same criticism of everything Bob Monroe did. Some people probably think the same of Chris Carter, who's book is being discussed over on Beau's thread. How do you think Bruce's thread on a new technique would sound to someone who doesn't know how hard Bruce has worked to talk about verifiable information?

So if we criticize the, um, aberrant "mediums" without giving a basis for why they should be excluded or a basis for what is genuine and not theatrics, then we open up all else we do to the same criticism.

It all boils down to what the individual personally experiences and how that person interprets it within the context of his ot her current culture.

I don't know how to tell the difference between a fake medium who changes his or her voice on purpose from someone who may experience some kind of valid psychological shift that has an accompanying voice change associated with it. I don't know the limits of what is possible.

________________

Of course, I don't think the people who fake mediumship are half as "bad" as the folks who created the toxic assets, but that's another story, even though I think they are of the same mentality. :)

You are right Lucy, but it is the authoritative nature of some of these channeled "beings" (or fakes) that turns me off.  What care I for a supposedly eons old warrior named "Ramtha" coming through JZ Knight?  If the channeling is real, why should she have followers, and schools?  Because Ramtha is dead and communicating? Because somehow, he is more connected to God being discarnate or anceint?  Foolishness.

Love is often distinctly absent from the dialogue of channelers as are discussions of loving others and God.

We must learn lessons of love and life ourselves.  Those who flock to Ramtha or Hicks may be true seekers, but they just don't get that part of it.  Why are the mediums phony?  Because they "feel" phony, and act phony.

And more importantly, it is wrong to be a blind follower; you are essentially entering into a belief system or hollow heaven while you are still alive.  With Seth or Hicks, their main points are simple and unoriginal; thought creates reality.  How is this worthy of seminar after seminar (usually for over 200.00/single event/person)?

Knowing that something that rings true for you (i.e. thought attracting situation or thought creating reality), we should use our own introspection and apply the knowledge to our own situation or existence. 

The problem for me about mediumship or channeling only occurs when we follow blindly, because that is not learning or understanding; that is sheep like behaviour.

Matthew

Doc-

Just to add a point to your post- I think most if not all of us would agree that there's nothing more important than to understand the meaning of our life and how best to fulfill it.

I can't help, in this regard, to think of Mother Teresa and how she led her life.  She gave up all material comforts to help some of the most impoverished people on earth, and did so in horrible conditions where disease and starvation were rampant.

She understood that her purpose was to help others. 

I personally am convinced that even one day devoted to helping others is worth more than a lifetime of reading what channeled entities have to say about this or that.  Or more accurately, what charlatans who claim they are in touch with "highly advanced" entities have to say.....

There's nothing easy or entertaining when it comes to making personal sacrifices in order to better the lives of those less fortunate. 

It's much easier and yes, entertaining, to read about alien invasions or end of the world scenarios, or insects in the afterlife (!).  But ultimately it's a dead end road.  It doesn't do one thing to advance our own understanding of why we are here.

The Golden Rule is essentially the be-all and end-all of all teachings.  It is far more important than anything Ramtha, Seth, Elias, or any of the other so-called "teachers" proclaim.

R

Well this site is pretty much a place where independent thinkers show up so I wasn't worried about anyone here spending all their money following the Hicks around or playing all their savings on a lottery ticket because they thought they could divine the right number!

But I don't find all the arguments against this logically consistent  with defending what we sort of do here, and I haven't seen any answers to what is really going on in trance....(maybe Esther wouldn't say hi to me because she was tired;maybe being in trance is tiring.  who knows?)...and I don't see any arguments on how to use PUL to make this situation correct itself. HAving grown up always being in church on Sunday in the Bible-belt south and now living in Catholic-dominated Boston area, I personally would add organized Christianity to the list that had Abraham and Ramtha and "who"ever else to it...I don't know what I think of Mother Teresa. I wouldn't follow her either. In her pverty, she was supported as a nun, she didn't have to worry about dealing with culture to feed herself or a family, so I'm not impressed with her poverty. She helped many people but she was also a mouthpiece for a religion I consider to have been as much a force for evil as for good over history. (Why isn't the Pope on your list?) Her stance against birth control in my opinion acts to condemn some unborn children to poverty and death. This is not to say that Catholics are evil! there is a difference.

I'm still looking for an answer to what goes on when a trance or channeling occurs.

I believe what Doc said about the authoritative nature of supposed channeled entities is key. I doubt that a true light being would want to come through a person in a way where a cult-like following is created that benefits a channeler financially.

I figure light beings realize that one of the key problems with this world is that there are too many mindless followers, and not near enough independent thinkers.

Regarding Ramtha, I watched a video of a former JZ  Knight body guard, and he said she was clearly a fake. He also said she had a good ability to remember what she read and then regurgitate it. One day he found a book in her bedroom, looked at the words she had highlighted, and the next day while supposedly channeling Ramtha she spoke about the subjects that were highlighted with her own spin.

There was one occasion where Ramtha (JZ) told people not to go towards the light after they die. This troubled JZs followers. Because of where she was positioned she couldn't notice how agitated they were. During the intermission her security guard let her know.

After the intermission, in order to get her followers in line, she told them that they shouldn't go to the light after they die because if they do so the reptilians will get them, steal their incarnation memories, and then send them back to earth to incarnate again so they can collect some more memories.

I believe it is quite misleading to tell a bunch of  people who believe they are listening to an authoritative light being named Ramtha that they shouldn't go to the light after they die. Hopefully none of them follow her STUPID and irresponsible advice.

Kudos to Shirley Mclaine for helping JZ Knight become more popular. Perhaps it would have been good if Shirley realized "it is okay" to use your discrimination when it comes to channeled sources.

I believe it is important to add that we don't want to set things up so light beings don't have a way to communicate to us, but we need to look for the tell tale signs that let us know that something is amiss. For example, a person/channeler who has a bunch of followers who have lost the ability to think for themselves.

Regarding what Lucy said about Mother Teresa, perhaps she provided a good example of what Jesus meant by loving your neighbor as yourself (A principle I believe he taught, despite what Jane Roberts Seth claimed).

Regardless of what her financial security was, it seems to me that she dedicated her life to serving God and others. I figure a lot of ladies have pure motives for becoming nuns.

I think someone also mused about why peopel are attracted to this stuff.

I was thinking about that one day when I was in a foul mood. I have two jobs, neither of which I am overly fond. I have a very p/t schtick in a retail chain; I keep at it because of silly reasons, so it is not reasonable that I should get so annoyed with the customers, except all my coworkers do too. No matter how hard you work, there is a subset of customers who destroy the store, pulling things apart in their feeding frenzy shopping and leaving the place looking like a herd of five year olds descended for playtime and left all their toys in the floor. Why do adults do this? I could expand on this but I won't.

My other job is as a non-medical support role in a hospital; my work sometimes has me in the ED, which used to be called the ER but believe me it is more than one room. Not every case in the ED is television-worthy, which is a good thing because it is often sad when they are. And I know some of the less dramatic cases are still really sick,. But when I walk around and see the people, many of whom are medicare patients (this hospital has >50% medicare patients I think) and all of whom look ...lonely and scared and other things, I wonder what the connection between the behavior that drives me nuts at the retail store and the attitudes that bring folks to the ED is. Are the people who tear up the store the same ones who end up in these beds? Sometimes I wish some of these folks could go for reiki once a week; it seems what they realy want and need is attention. or they don't know why they are there.

and when I really ponder it , I am reminded of the quote "men lead lives of quiet desperation." Good ole Massachusetts boy said that.

What Thoreau said can be found many places, here is one:
http://www.trivia-library.com/b/origins-of-sayings-the-mass-of-men-lead-lives-of-quiet-desperation.htm

And I think the folks who go to Abraham or Ramtha or whatever are trying to not get to the end of their lives and find they have not really lived.

And the ideas about reality may have been around for centuries (Millenia maybe) but the churches aren't teachijng that, so people go to Abraham and Ramtha because they are. Where would you have them go? Please don't send them shopping to quiet their minds because I just got my section in order again and I want to keep it that way for a few minutes.

But I don't confuse the message and the messenger. Not sure you should even do that with Jesus.

I've never sat in a church and heard a practical explanation of how to apply Matthew 7:7. Which is the real thing I'm interested in!

I think (our) Matthew's remarks on the subconcious mind are really important. I think that is a topic worthy of deep analysis and discussion. I think some of the teaching of the subconcious mind used to be done through "fairy tales" but now we take a more direct approach when we talk about it. We take it to a new level that way too. Funny...the way to the higher self seems to go "down" through the subconcious mind.

I just saw your other post, recoverer. I don't really know anything about Ramtha. I conciously decided to not follow anyone when I decided I couldn't stay in the Christian church, not my style. As I said, I like Seth because I could read a book and besides Jane Roberts is dead now and isn't making money on Seth, and never did, not like the Hicks with Abraham.

The fakes were a real issue back when seances were popular. That's why people started asking hard questions about this stuff and one reason they tried to be scientific about it. I don't think Eileen Garrett was a fake but I can't explain how she did what she did. I believe you have written about your own experiences which were not positive and I understand you find the deception intolerable. But I can't figure out what the phenomenon is if all I do is complain about how deceived the "followers" are.

Regarding applying Matthew 7:7, it basically says keep on trying. The process of becoming a soul who can open up to divine inspiration is a process, and I've found that it doesn't tend to happen all at once.

To the extent we choose to cling to the attachments that prevent us from opening to divine inspiration, to that extent we won't be able to, no matter how much we make affirmations.

I believe that humility, grattitude and a desire to serve divine will and others is key.

Lucy said: "But I can't figure out what the phenomenon is if all I do is complain about how deceived the "followers" are."

Recoverer responds: "Sometimes it's hard to point out the faults of the deceivers without speaking about how people are deceived by them.

Fortunately, most people can only be deceived for so long before they inexplicably long for a change. Without such longings, and changing desires, we would all most certainly be stuck for quite some time. Sometimes my reality seems so fluid that I'm not sure what 'world' I'm in, but to trust self is key, to know self...and as some say, each of us are each other's teachers. But, only so far. That is because we are created equal, but also unique. Wouldn't this planet be such a bore without us all in it? And by all, I mean all beings, whoever they might be.

Quote:

Recoverer responds: "Sometimes it's hard to point out the faults of the deceivers without speaking about how people are deceived by them.

I don't want to point out the faults of the deceivers, if that is what they are. I want to understand the phenomena.

In those moments when I doubt there is a point to all this, there is no difference between the deceivers, as you call them, and anyone else, because we are all stuck in this greater (self) deception that is the world together.

Hopefully we will all get tired of that deception too and long for that change.

I believe there is a big difference between people who share what they have found without claiming to be infallible, without seeking followers, and without seeking to be put on a pedestal; and people who intentionally mislead others, claim to be infallible, seek followers, and seek to be put on a pedestal.

I believe what is key is how much somebody understands that when he (or she) shares information, it is essential that he doesn't do so in a manner that interferes with somebody else's ability  to think for himself. Such a person would do his best to not get others caught up in a belief system that leads them astray and hinders their spiritual growth.





Lucy wrote on Jan 10^th, 2011 at 4:34am:

Quote: Recoverer responds: "Sometimes it's hard to point out the faults of the deceivers without speaking about how people are deceived by them. I don't want to point out the faults of the deceivers, if that is what they are. I want to understand the phenomena. In those moments when I doubt there is a point to all this, there is no difference between the deceivers, as you call them, and anyone else, because we are all stuck in this greater (self) deception that is the world together. Hopefully we will all get tired of that deception too and long for that change.

Recoverer,

"[...] they shouldn't go to the light after they die. Hopefully none of them follow her STUPID and irresponsible advice."

'Go into the light', yet I wonder what percentage of the ones who say that has actually checked out their own advice. That's irresponsible. The only non-physical "tunnel" I like is the one from f12 leading to f34/35. People are free to choose their passage when passing, for me, a light tunnel or other vehicles of transportation to f27 or "home" isn't needed.

"I believe it is important to add that we don't want to set things up so light beings don't have a way to communicate to us, but we need to look for the tell tale signs that let us know that something is amiss. For example, a person/channeler who has a bunch of followers who have lost the ability to think for themselves."

The way you write, 'we don't want to', makes it look like you think the readers have lost the ability to think for themselves, but fortunately you save the day by doing that for us. From the bottom of our bleating hearts, thanks. ;)

Regarding various channeled material....I can't ever recall any of those "highly evolved entities" saying that what's important is how we treat each other.

Did any of them say that the golden rule needs to be followed?

Maybe so but not that I can recall and I've read tons of channeled stuff over the years.

Interesting isn't it. 

ACIM was supposedly channeled by Jesus.  If so, it's a far different Jesus than the one in the Bible.  ACIM's author says there's no such thing as sin, and no one should ever feel guilty about anything they do because they really didn't do what they thought they did.

Our earthly life is all an illusion so therefore we can't be held responsible for an illusory act.

So ask yourself this question: what is the agenda of the person who authored ACIM?  It can't possibly be to make us a better person.  So what could it possibly be?

I think I figured it out but I'll leave it at that.

R

I was sort of relieved to see that the website that was used to start this thread (Rick Ross)has entries on all sorts of organizations...

What is the point of talking about cults if you don't include the organized religions in that group? Especially when they do evil by preaching love and doing else.



http://www.rickross.com/reference/clergy/clergy1238.html


Boston Globe version:

http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2011/01/18/vatican_warned_irish_bishops_not_to_report_abuse/?page=full