Conversation Board - My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources

Seraphis1

Super Member

Offline

ALK Member

Posts: 1446

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #30 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 3:36pm

recoverer wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 2:26pm:

If a person wants to know whether it is possible to make contact with a particular spirit in a manner that is certain, then perhaps they should make an attempt to do so, rather than engaging in experience-lacking-intellectual activity.

If we set things up so we can never become certain, then we basically place ourselves within a psychological trap. Doing so reminds me or moral relativism. If we don't allow ourselves to see the difference between right and wrong, we won't do so.

Regarding what makes me certain about making contact with Jesus, first of all, years ago, I had what I refer to as my Night in Heaven experience. I was an atheist at the time. If somebody would've tried to tell me that the afterlife exists I would not had believed he or she. But then I had my experience, and it became crystal clear that the person of Jesus did in fact exist, and that in some way he represented divine reality (his spirit still does). There was nothing stodgy or repressive about this. It wasn't a matter of my engaging in some belief system because my way of understanding was at a deeper and far more certain level than we ordinarily understand. The funny thing is that eventhough I was open to this new way of understanding, I was still able to think in my old atheistic way. Therefore, I was able to compare my old way of understanding with my new way of understanding. I was quite surprised to find what I found out about Jesus and other things.

Well as I see it this is a perfect example of achieving a PERSONAL known… but, one needs to realize that it is a personal known… and applies ONLY to yourself… the objection many have is when that personal known becomes a cause celebre to brow beat others into believing your way…

S.

Back to top

IP Logged

Seraphis1

Super Member

Offline

ALK Member

Posts: 1446

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #31 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 3:45pm

recoverer wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 2:26pm:

Regarding ACIM, I gave the course a good try for a while, despite some hints from my spirit guidance to be careful with it. Then I realized it was having a brainwashing effect on me. So I decided to be humble about the matter and realized that I wasn't able to discriminate it with certainty. So I prayed to God and Christ and asked them if the course comes from Christ. On every occasion I asked I was in some way told "no." Because I felt love, peace, expansiveness and divinity each time I asked this question, it seems reasonable to believe that a being who represents the light responded. This is especially so since my guidance has proven to be trustworthy.

Eventually I reached the point where I allowed myself to read ACIM with discernment, and despite some of the nicey things it says, it does have errors and is misleading.

What are those errors?

S.

Back to top

IP Logged

Seraphis1

Super Member

Offline

ALK Member

Posts: 1446

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #32 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 3:55pm

recoverer wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 2:26pm:

Whoever the words came from, they were delivered in such a clever way where unless a person uses keen discernment, he isn't likely to see how the course is misleading. This is especially so if a person lacks the openness to thoroughly question the course. I have found that some people become so psychologically and emotionally caught up in it that they lack the freedom of mind to question it in a thorough way. They would much rather throw rocks at a person such as myself. I have received several messages that stated that the course has a malevolent source.

Can you tells us who the malevolent sources are… it is easy to cast dispersion, but, can this be proven… some Christians believe that Obama is the antichrist, some believe Hitler was the antichrist… or Osama ben Laden… all pulled of the air and tacked on to whoever they dislike. And how many anti-christs are there. Glen Beck is screaming the sky is falling and the Middle east is in a conspiracy with the Bush family, communist (do they still exist) and islam all conspiring to create an Kalifate…) he pulls this all out of his puny brain… making it up as he goes… the facts on the ground are that the Arab League was pulled kicking and scream into the UN call for a no fly zone… in Libya… and when it happened the screamed that’s not what we wanted… is this the group that is going to create a central governing Kalifate when they can’t make up their minds whether to have a nofly zone…

S.

Back to top

IP Logged

Justin aka Vasya

Ex Member

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #33 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 3:56pm

To Lucy: Just remember that...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjY_uSSncQw

Wink

(i had to do it)

More seriously. A number of times on this site i've read or have been told from a few different posters over the years that Jesus is just a myth, a made up invention, or a deliberate negative conspiracy theory designed to fool and mislead the sheeple (or sentiments to that effect). Ah, let's not forget the astral construct that exists based only on people's collective beliefs.

Now, Jesus is very, very important to me. You could say he is one of the most important and sacred things in my life.

If i was an insecure person, or insecure about my beliefs and experiences involving him, i would imagine that hearing people say such things could potentially be quite upsetting to me.

Yet, that is not my reaction at all. I tend to ignore it, or at most i will simply state that there are a number of credible non religious psychic/spiritual sources (some with definite verifications) that state to the contrary, that he was indeed a real person who did much of what is written in the N.T. Plus there is my own personal experience which contradicts this.

But what i don't do is try to make people stop saying such things. It's their belief, their opinion, and they are entitled to it and to speak it as often as they like though it contradicts the very foundation of my being.

I would imagine that Jesus is much more important and sacred to me and close to my heart than say R.B. and his work is for most people here for an example.

So i honestly have a hard time understanding where people are coming from when some criticize a source or belief system that another personally like and they get upset enough about it to claim that they think those people are trying to "shame them", or other extreme labeling.

My question is, why is my opinion and belief so important and affecting to you (speaking in general)? Why can't you just skip over it like i skip over the potentially upsetting to me things, or just state your case of why you believe differently?

All i know, and can state is that it's never my intention to shame or put down anyone here when i happen to disagree with them or point out lacks in an outer source they may happen to like.

More specifically where were you Lucy all those times that Christianity was criticized, bashed, and/or marginialized over the years here?

If one sticks up for one particular source or belief system and says it's wrong to criticize that source, then in all fairness then that must apply to all. Yet, where are the defenders then? They are acting like hypocrites, that's what and where they are. They don't "like" Christianity, therefore it becomes ok and perfectly acceptable to criticize, bash, and/or marginalize it.

But because they do "like" R.B., ACIM, Seth or whatever source, then when others criticize those particular sources it then becomes "wrong" and should not be allowed.

In other words, i do unto others as i would like have done to me. That's all anyone can do if they are not a full mind and heart reader, especially on a public I-net forum wherein one communicates through typed words.

So i say, continue to disagree with or point out the flaws or lacks in my particular beliefs or opinions. It's ok, i don't mind. I might disagree with you but i won't try to shut you up however subtly or directly one can do that.

Back to top

IP Logged

recoverer

Super Member

Offline

Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 5027
Gender: male

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #34 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 3:56pm

I don't believe that pointing out questionable things about some sources of information is the same thing as disrespecting somebody else's beliefs.

I believe that people should be free to find out for themselves, but this is a hard thing to do when there are many sources of information that will lead them astray. So many sources present themselves in a way where people end up getting brainwashed by them to varying degrees.

Volu wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 3:31pm:

Recoverer,
"My ability to open up to divine love has improved significantly."

What does your guide think of your crusade? - Though we're on quite different paths it seems that we share a lesson about not overstepping the bounds of respecting others' beliefs. I very much agree that silence isn't the way to go, and really do appreciate honesty, but there's something about pushing the edge way too hard and sounding like a broken record, though you seem to have a good heart. Having good intentions doesn't mean the process or the end result will resemble the intentions started out with.

Back to top

IP Logged

Seraphis1

Super Member

Offline

ALK Member

Posts: 1446

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #35 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 4:07pm

recoverer wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 2:26pm:

Also, William Thetford, a man who worked as a mind control specialist for the CIA, talked her into continuing to take notes. I find it hard to believe that the spirit of Christ would choose a lady with a strong distaste for spirituality to be his messenger. It also seems hard for me to believe that Jesus would select a lady who has a strong association with a CIA mind control specialist.

You know, of course, that the Monroe Institute WAS the main creator of the CIA’s remote viewing program whose star pupil was Joe McMonagle… intimately associated with the Monroe Institue and once married to Monroe’s daughter… also, Monroe made very concerted efforts to distance himself and his work for the metaphysical.

S.

Back to top

IP Logged

Seraphis1

Super Member

Offline

ALK Member

Posts: 1446

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #36 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 4:19pm

Here is what recoverer left out of the Schucman reference:

When Schucman experienced some personal difficulties and hesitance after hearing the Voice, Bill Thetford, her work supervisor and friend, contacted Hugh Lynn Cayce (son of the celebrity psychic Edgar Cayce) at his Association for Research and Enlightenment in Virginia Beach, Virginia to seek his advice and counsel. Shucman later met with Cayce before she began to record the Course.
Kenneth Wapnick was a clinical psychologist who directed a school for disturbed children and served as chief psychologist at Harlem Valley State Hospital from 1967 through 1972. In 1972, Wapnick left his Jewish faith and converted to Catholicism so he could become a monk.[5] Fr. Benedict Groeschel, a priest and a member of the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin, who also had a doctorate in psychology, heard of Wapnick's conversion, which interested him, and so they met.[citation needed]
Groeschel, who studied under Thetford and worked with Schucman, arranged an introduction of Wapnick to Schucman and Thetford in November 1972.[citation needed] In 1973, Schucman and Thetford presented the third draft of the complete manuscript to Wapnick and Groeschel. Wapnick subsequently became a teacher of the Course, co-founder and president of the Foundation for A Course in Miracles (FACIM), and a director and executive committee member of the Foundation for Inner Peace (FIP). Groeschel was sharply critical (see Reception).
Wapnick reviewed the draft and discussed with Schucman further revisions that were needed to place the book in final form. Over the next thirteen months, Wapnick and Schucman edited the manuscript by rearranging necessitated by deleting personal material, changing chapter and section headings, and correcting various inconsistencies in paragraph structure, punctuation, and capitalization.[6] This editing process was completed in approximately February 1975.

S.

P.S.: This looks like just another New Age book written through the auspices of a 'non-physical' source... who did not explicitly identify itself but, others seemed to have ... identified it...

Back to top

IP Logged

recoverer

Super Member

Offline

Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 5027
Gender: male

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #37 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 4:30pm

Seraphis asked: What are the errors(of ACIM)?

Recoverer responds: Here are some of them:

1. It has too much of an all or nothing approach. It makes statements that make it seem as if there is no point in trying to overcome specific limited patterns of mind because until you undo the supposed separation, it won't matter. I have found that the more I have dealt with specific limiting thought patterns the more I've grown spiritually.

2. It places way too much emphasis on the ego. It says "ego this, ego that," over and over again. One night I received the message, "Drop it (the course), it makes the ego bigger." I've read what some people who have been influenced by ACIM have to say, and they have this big ego philosophy they like to speak about. In some cases it seems as if they are putting a lot of effort into juggling their belief system about ego, rather than doing what they need to do in order to grow spiritually. They develop a belief in an ego entity to an extent that it ends up being a diversion. I believe this is a very slick and negative strategy that comes from the being who gave Helen the words she received. The fact of how people live according to love to varying degrees shows that doing so isn't an all or nothing affair.

3. It tries to get people to believe that God has nothing to do with this world by saying things such as "Everything God creates is perfect." Regarding this saying, if everything God creates is perfect, then where did that which created this world come from? God is not separate from this world. I haven't obtained the highest state possible, yet I'm able to experience divine love.

4. It tries to get people to be indifferent about the problems of this world by making statements such as "Nothing you see is real." Its 365 day affirmation course serves this end. I can't remember the exact words, but it actually has people repeat affirmations that serve the purpose of making them believe that the intense suffering many people go through isn't actually taking place. Going by the messages I've received, Christ would not strive to make people indifferent. I find it hard to believe that Christ would come up with a one size fits all 365-day affirmation course.

5. It states that there isn't a being named Satan, and then leaves it at that. A person is liable to come to a conclusion that there in no such thing as negative beings. In fact, Warren Smith wrote that he and his wife started to be troubled by beings of a dark nature, they shared this with members of their ACIM reading group, and none of these members believed that Warren and his wife were actually being troubled by negative beings. They assumed that they created these negative beings. I figure that if Jesus was going to deliver so many words to a person, he would say at least a little about negative beings. He probably wouldn't give them impression that there are no negative influences at all.

6. The course is very repetitive and states that when you don't understand what is said accept it anyway. Such as approach can cause a person to become brainwashed. Once a person is brainwashed by the course good luck getting him to see this. A course that purposely seeks to brainwash people can't be a good thing.

Back to top

IP Logged

Justin aka Vasya

Ex Member

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #38 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 4:33pm

Seraphis1 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 3:45pm:

recoverer wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 2:26pm:

Regarding ACIM, I gave the course a good try for a while, despite some hints from my spirit guidance to be careful with it. Then I realized it was having a brainwashing effect on me. So I decided to be humble about the matter and realized that I wasn't able to discriminate it with certainty. So I prayed to God and Christ and asked them if the course comes from Christ. On every occasion I asked I was in some way told "no." Because I felt love, peace, expansiveness and divinity each time I asked this question, it seems reasonable to believe that a being who represents the light responded. This is especially so since my guidance has proven to be trustworthy.

Eventually I reached the point where I allowed myself to read ACIM with discernment, and despite some of the nicey things it says, it does have errors and is misleading.

What are those errors?

S.

I know you were addressing this to Albert, but since my experience was very similar to Albert's in the general, i will take it on.

I was initially very excited and enthusiastic about ACIM. It was highly recommended to me by someone who at the time i thought was a closer friend to me. I did not hesitate to spend the 20 or so dollars i spent on it years ago to buy it brand new.

I spent a lot of time reading it. One odd thing that i noticed is that invariably i would become very sleepy reading it and so would have to put it down not long after.

While i thought this odd, i persisted. In hindsight, i started noticing myself talking a lot about the big EGO word and concept. I started to focus a lot more on ego in myself and others. "Yup, that's ego talking" or "ego this, ego that". Ego became number one enemy.

Then i had a vivid dream wherein i was climbing a tall strong, straight tree. I came to a point on the tree where there was a large branch branching off. This branch looked strong and sturdy to me, so i started to walk out onto the branch thinking that it would more than hold my weight.

Well i was mislead by how the branch looked, the branch snapped and i started to fall. As soon as i awoke, i intuitively knew that this dream was symbolizing my involvement with ACIM. Like Albert noticed and was told by his guidance, it actually makes ones "ego" bigger rather than reducing it.

Here is how it works to do this. You have to understand princples of the subconscious mind, hypnotic suggestion, and other related phenomena.

A good hypnotherapist knows that to change a person's habits, you often have to reach deeper into their subconscious mind to make such changes. The subconscious mind is receptive to any positive suggestion whether it be helpful/constructive or non constructive.

What you need to do is simply to relax or bore the person's conscious mind enough so that some of that "chatter" subsides, and the receptive/passive subconscious mind comes to the fore.

Then you have to make a positive suggestion in terms of the present. For example, if one is afraid of water, you don't give a suggestion like "you won't be afraid of water anymore." That won't work effectively. What would work is saying something like, "Every-time you enter water, you feel completely comfortable, relaxed, at peace, and in control."

In other words, you don't tell the subconscious what you don't want ONLY what you do want. If you give a positive suggestion of what you don't want, THAT is what will get programmed. A suggestion has to be completely positively/ONE WAY directed.

Ok, how does this related to ACIM. ACIM is written in a somewhat unique way in that it's extremely repetitive. It says the same things over and over in slightly different ways.

In other words, it's specifically designed to lead one into a hypnotic/subconsciously receptive state by boring the conscious mind through constant repetition. But that's not the problem in and of itself with ACIM.

It's the suggestions contained there within, which is the problem. Go back to the above hypnosis examples i give of how to make constructive change to the subconscious.

ACIM speaks a lot about ego throughout the whole of the regular part of the course (not as much during the exercises). Not only does it constantly mention ego, but it does so in a polarized-fighting-is an enemy of Love/Spirit/Oneness manner.

See the words it speaks on Love/Spirit/Oneness are all very true. This part resonates with the deeper "Soul" aspects of a person as truth. But half truths are worse than whole lies, for unlike whole lies, half truths can deceive even the Soul.

But what does it actually program? It programs polarization. Polarization leads to imbalance and leads to more ego expression.

To really change or transform "ego" in self, you don't focus on that (especially not during a hypnotic state), but you focus on what will transform that within you. That is attunement to Love, Oneness, givingness, patience, tolerance, etc.

If ACIM in it's hypnotic/suggestive ways spoke solely about the benefits and necessity of attuning to Love/Oneness/Spirit, it would be a great course, but it programs polarization instead. Hence why Albert's guidance specifically told him one time, "drop it, it makes the ego bigger". It just focuses too much on capital EGO.

I believe this was all done on purpose, either as a public mind experiment of which the U.S. gov. (particularly the CIA) is known to have done a number of these via clandestine operations, or as the product of an ill intentioned nonphysical Consciousness trying to work through Helen.

Those who have eyes to see and ears to hear, will understand what i'm saying.

And sorry to say, i may sound like i'm arrogant when saying this, but there are those who do have more discernment about these things than others, and such people have a responsibility to state their experiences and perceptions when it comes to such potentially misleading/brainwashing type sources.

Back to top

IP Logged

recoverer

Super Member

Offline

Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 5027
Gender: male

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #39 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 4:42pm

Seraphis said:

Well as I see it this is a perfect example of achieving a PERSONAL known… but, one needs to realize that it is a personal known… and applies ONLY to yourself… the objection many have is when that personal known becomes a cause celebre to brow beat others into believing your way…

Recoverer responds: As opposed to taking on Robert Bruce's and David Hawkin's personal knowns, one could try to make contact with Christ and find out that way. At least I tried to find out about ACIM from Christ himself rather than allowing Hawkins, Tolle, Oprah or my limited intellect tell me.

The very fact of how you say "personal known" shows that you didn't consider what I wrote with an open heart and mind. Apparently, because you're still being defensive about Hawkins etc., you aren't willing to see if I have anything worthwhile to share.

Brow beat? Why is it brow beating when I write numerous posts but not brow beating when you do so? Your continual usage of attacks such as "brow beat" probably aren't impressive to a person who has a discerning mind. Only people who are on the same negate what Recoverer says bandwagon would approve of such talk.

Back to top

IP Logged

Justin aka Vasya

Ex Member

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #40 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 4:47pm

Seraphis1 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 4:07pm:

recoverer wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 2:26pm:

Also, William Thetford, a man who worked as a mind control specialist for the CIA, talked her into continuing to take notes. I find it hard to believe that the spirit of Christ would choose a lady with a strong distaste for spirituality to be his messenger. It also seems hard for me to believe that Jesus would select a lady who has a strong association with a CIA mind control specialist.

You know, of course, that the Monroe Institute WAS the main creator of the CIA’s remote viewing program whose star pupil was Joe McMonagle… intimately associated with the Monroe Institue and once married to Monroe’s daughter… also, Monroe made very concerted efforts to distance himself and his work for the metaphysical.

S.

Monroe was not involved in this except as to let some agents come down to TMI and train in his courses. He and his staff said that they were usually pretty easy to spot despite that they were trying to be "under cover".

Monroe and McMoneagle btw, had a falling out for some years, which was only reconciled when Monroe was on his deathbed. It states in his 2nd biography that he would not speak to either Nancy or Joe for a long time.

No one but they know what this falling out was truly about. There is plenty of speculation though.

Back to top

IP Logged

recoverer

Super Member

Offline

Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 5027
Gender: male

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #41 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 5:04pm

On a couple of occasions I asked who Helen Suchman received the words from and on each occasion I was shown symbolic visual imagery that suggested it came from a malicious being. On one occasion I was first shown a devilish looking being and then an unfriendly looking alien. I believe I was shown differing images because if I was shown just one image I might mistakingly conclude that the being looks precisely as I was shown. How it looks probably doesn't align with how people see things. Whatever the case it wasn't symbolized in a positive way. At the same time I was shown a visual image that made the point that the course directs people in a direction that is opposite of Christ consciousness.

It is true that some people read the course and still manage to do okay. It is a matter of what extent they allow the course to influence them. To the extent it misleads it will prevent them from opening up to direct inspiration from the spirit of Christ or a being like him.

Seraphis1 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 3:55pm:

recoverer wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 2:26pm:

Whoever the words came from, they were delivered in such a clever way where unless a person uses keen discernment, he isn't likely to see how the course is misleading. This is especially so if a person lacks the openness to thoroughly question the course. I have found that some people become so psychologically and emotionally caught up in it that they lack the freedom of mind to question it in a thorough way. They would much rather throw rocks at a person such as myself. I have received several messages that stated that the course has a malevolent source.

Can you tells us who the malevolent sources are… it is easy to cast dispersion, but, can this be proven… some Christians believe that Obama is the antichrist, some believe Hitler was the antichrist… or Osama ben Laden… all pulled of the air and tacked on to whoever they dislike. And how many anti-christs are there. Glen Beck is screaming the sky is falling and the Middle east is in a conspiracy with the Bush family, communist (do they still exist) and islam all conspiring to create an Kalifate…) he pulls this all out of his puny brain… making it up as he goes… the facts on the ground are that the Arab League was pulled kicking and scream into the UN call for a no fly zone… in Libya… and when it happened the screamed that’s not what we wanted… is this the group that is going to create a central governing Kalifate when they can’t make up their minds whether to have a nofly zone…

S.

Back to top

IP Logged

Seraphis1

Super Member

Offline

ALK Member

Posts: 1446

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #42 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 7:18pm

recoverer wrote on Apr 13^th, 2011 at 4:42pm:

Seraphis said:

Well as I see it this is a perfect example of achieving a PERSONAL known… but, one needs to realize that it is a personal known… and applies ONLY to yourself… the objection many have is when that personal known becomes a cause celebre to brow beat others into believing your way…

Recoverer responds: As opposed to taking on Robert Bruce's and David Hawkin's personal knowns, one could try to make contact with Christ and find out that way. At least I tried to find out about ACIM from Christ himself rather than allowing Hawkins, Tolle, Oprah or my limited intellect tell me.

The very fact of how you say "personal known" shows that you didn't consider what I wrote with an open heart and mind. Apparently, because you're still being defensive about Hawkins etc., you aren't willing to see if I have anything worthwhile to share.

Brow beat? Why is it brow beating when I write numerous posts but not brow beating when you do so? Your continual usage of attacks such as "brow beat" probably aren't impressive to a person who has a discerning mind. Only people who are on the same negate what Recoverer says bandwagon would approve of such talk.

The very fact that you are (seem to be) angry that your personal known does not resonate with me or others and you demand that we see it your way because your way is the right way is what has various posters at odds with you and you intimate there is something lacking in our intellect IS brow beating!!

I can accept you have a personal known… my personal known was that Jesus was a leader of the Essene community a bonified spiritual leader of significant awakening… but I am a Buddhist and a Monrovian… so I spend almost no time in attempting to relate to Jesus… QED!!

S.

Back to top

IP Logged

recoverer

Super Member

Offline

Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 5027
Gender: male

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #43 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 8:24pm

Seraphis:

If it doesn't resonate with you that's your choice.

But it doesn't become something as limited as a personal known simply because you don't know about it. If my experiences with Jesus are based on something factual and beyond me, what positive purpose does it serve to minimalize them?

Since you didn't have the experiences I speak of, you aren't in a qualified position to determine how far reaching the implications are.

My experiences with Jesus were just as real as my experience of writing this post. In fact they were more real because I was connected to a level of being that is more primary than the temporary manifestation of this world.

Back to top

IP Logged

Beau

Super Member

Offline

Posts: 1176
Greenville SC
Gender: male

Re: My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources
Reply #44 - Apr 13^th, 2011 at 8:57pm

So do we all agree there such things as Subjective Facts? That is the only way I can call Albert's (anyone else's) explorations factual, at least as they have been described so far. I know I don't have any objective facts to offer of my experiences, only feelings that feel very different from anything else I've had happen, but I couldn't say what I have learned is at all factual

Back to top

All the world's a stage...whose stage?--that is the question!...or is it the answer...Who is on first.

IP Logged