I have never read anything of Edgar Cayce, I only heard about him. But personally I think this is just a lot of bs. I think Wilcock is trying to make a ride on the reputation of Cayce. Or maybe he is even possessed by some dark spirit who lurks on Wilcock's energy by fooling him that way. Dark spirits can be very devious in many ways.

You will not have to expect any of that from Rulof and his masters. They already said in the books that they will not come back to Earth, not by reincarnation, or channeling or whatever means people may come up with.
Rulof and his Masters have completed their task. You will understand that especially if you have read his Cosmology and Lectures.
There are many thousands of spirits of light ready and waiting for an opportunity to get in touch with Earth people to help them further. But you can't do that by impersonating Rulof or one of his Masters. That creates disharmony. A true spirit of light understands that and will stay away from that.
So if anybody claims to be channeling Rulof or one of his masters you can rest assure that person is either talking bs or is being possessed by a smart spirit of the dark spheres.

True Evidence and Verification is very hard to find in this area. If at all it is possible.

There is a book of Rulof called Spiritual Gifts. In this book all the gifts which Jozef Rulof possessed are explained in detail in just as many chapters: writing mediumship, speaking under inspiration, the psychic trance, mediumistic painting and drawing, spiritual clairvoyance and the healing medium. In addition, the following supernatural phenomena, among others, are treated: communication with the cross and board and the planchette, spiritual photography, direct voice, materialisations and dematerialisations, levitation, apports, rappings and ghost phenomena.

The conclusion of that book is that deception in this area is so dreadfully great that the sober being rightly no longer wishes to know anything more about all that spiritual carry-on.

Berserk2 wrote on Oct 16^th, 2012 at 5:34pm:


  What exact visions are you talking about Don?  I went through a period of being intensely interested in and researched this vast work (Cayce's) both directly and the through the lens of other authors--many who injected their own beliefs, interpretations, and misconceptions and often many of them quoting far too little but extrapolating far too much. 

    My understanding is that Cayce's guidance for the most part outlined general trends to be noticed, rather than this or than specific major event, or a specific date of "the changes".  The major exception is the 1936, inner earth upheaval which we will deal with in a bit. 

   Because this work is so vast in scope and sheer information, it's easy to take a line or two out of it and say, "look, Cayce said this and obviously it's not true and didn't come to pass." 

  You need the larger context--in that sense, this work is in many ways like the Bible.  The Bible makes much more sense if taken as a whole at the same time of the specific parts, rather than just taking out individual parts. 

  This is the larger context, briefly summarized for reasons of brevity: 

  Cayce's guidance indicated in a couple of different readings that an upheaval would and did occur deep within the Earth in 1936.  One can logically speculate that Cayce's guidance was talking about the inner, independently rotating core of the Earth which acts as the inner "engine" of the Earth and which generates the Earth's magnetic field. 

  They said that this upheaval and change deep within the Earth caused a differentiation in the alignment of the axis of same to Polaris.  Unfortunately, it was not specifically specified whether it was this inner core or the outer Earth.  We know that it was not the outer Earth that shifted in relation to Polaris.   

However, the latest research on the inner core indicates that researchers believe that the inner core's axis is shifted some 10 degrees or so from the rest of the Earth currently.  (hence, there are two axis's of the Earth, the inner core's and the outer, rest of the Earth.  The latter's still aligns to Polaris and the former does not) Unfortunately, we do not know whether it's always been this way, or if this is a relatively recent developement as Cayce's guidance hinted it was.

  Due to this inner upheaval/change, they outlined that we would gradually begin to see various Earth changes become noticed more within the Earth.  They referenced on more than one occasion this trend of increasing change beginning from 1958 to 1998.  However, this is not when the bulk of the changes would take place in--that was going to be AFTER 1998 and no specific times to events were given, just general trends of the western portion of America being broken up, Japan being broken up and much going into the ocean, etc.  Rather the 58' to 98' period-- this was only the beginning of it becoming noticed.

  Some of these trends including a general global warming, particularly noticed at the Polar regions.  An increase in intensity and frequency of earthquakes, volcanic activity.  More Consciousness oriented changes were also outlined.  Also starting in the 58' era were said to be Lights being seen in the skies, and a general growing spiritual awakening. 

  Many of these readings have been grossly misinterpreted, here are a couple of examples: 

  "Q--Will the Earth upheavals in during 1936 affect San Fransico as it did in 1906?
  "A--This'll be a baby beside what it will be in 1936."  Excerpted from Reading 270-30

Without the larger context and understanding of what this work says as a whole, one might read the above and say, "Edgar Cayce said a huge earthquake would happen in San Fran in 1936!" 

  Rather, what they were really saying was that the upheaval in the Earth that happened in 36' would eventually lead to at some undetermined later time (after 98) earthquakes and activities that would make the 1906 event seem small and paltry by comparison.  I have it on good sources that the West coast event will happen relatively soon btw. 

  Here is another example of a commonly misinterpreted and overly sensationalized reading:

"Q--What great change or the beginning of what change, if any, is to take place in the earth in the year 2000 to 2001 A.D.?
  A-When there is the shifting of the poles.  Or a new cycle begins."  Excerpted from Reading 826-8

  There were numerous authors who prior to 2000 wrote books which referenced this reading and basically said, "Edgar Cayce said that the Poles would shift by the end of 2001!"  Obviously, this didn't happen, but was this really what they were saying to begin with?  Read it a little more carefully. 

  First the questioner uses the qualifying term of "or the beginning of", and the answer is relative to that and they even say, "Or a new cycle begins."  The question was somewhat open ended, as was the answer.  In fact, in a few other readings they repeated that even by 98, these changes would still be gradual and not cataclysmic in nature.  It was sometime after the 98' period that we would begin to start to see the more intense manifestations of this original inner Earth upheaval. 

  Cayce's guidance repeatedly ascertained that the future was not written in stone for the most part, especially as to specific timing of events.  They said that the prayers of the many, the directed positive intentions and actions of groups, etc. could change some things.  I will be the first to say that when it comes to the future Cayce's info wasn't 100 percent correct, but the general trends have been extremely accurate on a whole. 

  They predicted global warming right on time, decades before it started to even first be observed.  They predicted the UFO-- lights in the sky phenomenon well before.   They predicted a resurgence in spiritual seeking and gradual change in Consciousness towards the more spiritual and a growing conflict with the self oriented materialists. 

  And we will see in the years to come that the outlining of the inner Earth upheaval and axis differentiation that was said to take place in 36' and which would eventually lead, after 98', to more cataclysmic Earth changes was more than accurate.    While they referenced to the fluidic, freewilled influenced nature of time and events, they also said this about the Earth changes, "Q-Are details of the earth's eruptions in 1936 so fixed that you can give me an outline of the Pacific Coast area to be affected?
A-...That some are due and will occur is written, as it were..as to specific date or time in the present this may not be given."  Reading 270-32   In other readings, they reference to the changes that "will" and "must" occur in the Earth. 

  What i've seen personally, the large Solar event did not have to happen, and even yet may not occur.  But i know it WILL occur if Israel and/or America decide to attack Iran as they are planning to currently.  This World War III conflagration , if it takes place, will be broken up by the Creative Forces.

  Isn't it interesting Don that some many different sources speak of such similar Earth changes?  So many NDE's, Bob Monroe and most of his original explorers, Bruce Moen, the Fatima prophecies, many Native American prophecies, etc, etc. 

  Personally, i don't really need any of the above when i'm getting direct information about this via dreams, meditation visions, and other means, and not only myself but my wife and a spiritual friend of mine. 

  Good luck with your "metaphorical" interpretation of it all.  I will leave you will a Biblical referenced reading from Cayce's guidance about this, "The deluge was not a myth (as many would have you believe) but a period when man had so belittled himself with the cares of the world, with the deceitfulness of his own knowledge and power, as to require that there be a return to his dependence wholly--physically and mentally--upon the Creative Forces.
   
   Will this entity see such again occur in the earth?  Will it be among the those who may be given those direction as to how, where, the elect may be preserved for the replenishing again of the earth?  Remember, not by water--for it is the mother of life in the earth--but rather by the elements, fire."  Excerpted from Reading 3653-1

  I've seen this fire many times in many different ways.  It is not nuclear, but it is Solar, and it is the primary agent of bringing balance back and leveling the playing field in the Earth.
Again, when you see the Red skies, you will know that i speak the truth of this matter.  The red skies is basically a very intense "aurora borealis" like event wherein very intensely charged solar particles and energies are interacting with the Earth's magnetic field and atmospheric gasses.   This will be strong enough to happen all over the Earth, even at the equatorial regions.

  But i do agree with you on one thing, December 21 2012 as a specific date will be no big deal in and of itself.  It will come and go with no "bang".  However, before this date will happen some very, very large quakes in CA and after this date, a very probable powerful Solar storm event may happen, and definitely so if the wars talked in the above are started. 

  I would freely admit that you know the Bible much better than myself in most ways and in most areas, but i definitely know Cayce's material much better and more over i've had personal guidance that has confirmed aspects of this information, sometimes consciously and directly sought and received and other times gotten when not directly and consciously seeking.