Source: "Seth Speaks" 366-67:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Don

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

Wow, me and Don agree on something..

peace

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Alysia says:

<<I disagree that anything is exposed>>

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

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

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

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

"History" is a Story.

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

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

I was also interested in the Bible at the time.

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

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

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

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

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

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

That was enough.

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

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

If so, aren't you the lucky one?

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

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

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

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

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

love, blink

Boris-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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