I "can't" say that I totaly agree.

I understand about being respectful.

For example, if I go to an event like the New Living Expo in San Francisco I don't go to a booths that are based on cults and speak against such cults.

I wouldn't walk in a church and start speaking against the religion of that church.

But a forum that is open to the public? What's the story? People can basically advertise their favorite false channeled source and nobody is supposed to say anything against it?

What about when Don starts a thread that questions the effectiveness and validity of mediumship or the validity of reincarnation? Is that okay? I believe it is, even if I don't agree with some of the things he says.

If people can't handle hearing opposing viewpoints, perhaps they should stick to forums where people are afraid to examine and speak the truth even when not doing so enables misleading sources.

If anybody ever disagrees with a source I refer to, please feel free to say so. I wouldn't want to play a part in getting other people involved with something that is misleading. I believe I am not so fragile that I'll break up into pieces if somebody questions a source I refer to.

 

BobMoenroe:

I'm not certain what you're insinuating with "nagging," but consider it this way.

Justin started this thread. Nobody was forced to open it. Several people responded including me. A back and forth discussion took place.

If this was a verbal conversation it would probably take somewhere around 10 minutes.

Have you ever had a conversation with somebody that took more than 10 minutes, and it didn't seem like people were nagging each other?

Sometimes intelligent and well thought out conversations require more than a few statements from each person that partakes in the conversation.

There is also the matter of my trying to be considerate and respond to each person who said something to me on this thread. I apologize if I missed anybody. If I respond to you later, please don't consider it nagging.



Quote:

Quote:


This concept that physical reality is a illusion is challenging. Trying to get behind it is like trying to get behind the Big Bang (before it happened that is). I think this kind of teaching is meant to challenge the belief that physical reality is whatever we think it is and to get us to try to reach some new kind of understanding.  What if getting a new understanding is important in reaching Christ Conciousness?

There is other information of sorts that support the idea that physical reality is not etched in stone the way we believe it is. Communication from NDEs hints at this. Anita Moorjani wrote of changing the outcome of her illness by choosing between two possibilites while focused on the other side.  Natalie Sudman also wrote of making choices while on the other side. This could not happen if things work the way we claim, if the world was real the way we usually think it is. And I don't have any reason to think either of those is interested in ACIM.

And Gerald Jampolsky (sp?) has obviously been concerned with alleviating suffering.

no simple answers.

Pursuant to what was recently discussed, I restate below what I said on the Nanci Dannison thread.

I'd like to add that when God projected what some people refer to as a hologram, the energy to do so came from his own being. Since this energy came from his own being, how unreal could it be?

When one experiences something such as love or suffering in this World, one does in fact "have" such an experience. This is true even if this way of existence doesn't last for all of eternity.

What I am now saying is something I feel before I think about it. It is hard to verbally express what I am feeling.

*****************

"If Source had the ability to create the incredibly complex virtual reality it created, then there must've been more to Source than just pure consciousness when it decided to start creating.

Source was able to create as it did not only because it has the ability to be aware, but because it also had the ability to remember, think and learn from how it made use of its creative ability that comes from no other place but its self, just as its awareness comes from itself.

To say that Source's ability to learn and create isn't real is the same as saying that its ability to be aware and experience love isn't real.

Speaking of virtual reality might be useful in that it might help a person get away from thinking in rigid physical terms, but when it comes down to it there isn't a such thing as real or not real. That which is just simply exists. Reality is beyond being either physical or non-physical--a way of thinking that is the result of some people believing that there is only that which is physical. I wonder how people thought of this World before physical science was created.

   Well, it's interesting.  Here are some facts.  I started this thread to speak about channeling in a broad and general way.  I initially only brought up two sources, ones that i respect and which appear to me to be more expanded than not.  I wanted to talk about the science of attunement, and how it's not a particularly easy process to directly and clearly communicate with expanded guidance in the sense of how some channelers do. (so casually and automatically, as if they were speaking directly to us in english).

  Neither Recoverer or i brought Seth, ACIM, or the like into the conversation originally on this thread.  OTHERS did. 

  Once others did, we did address these. Yet, we are the ones that get blamed for rehashing stuff.   Interesting, no?

  Personally, i did not want to talk about ACIM, Seth, in the particular because these had been brought up a number of times in the past, though like Albert said, probably less than some have exaggerated. 


    It would be interesting if folks here, and in general, started to check these outer sources against what expanded guidance tells them within, but again, under more ideal circumstances.  Going from my experience, i suspect a lot of the popular sources out there would soon lose their fan bases.

  This is something Albert and i have practiced, because we are humble enough (and that's not a word i would generally associate myself with) to realize that our personality's minds and perceptions just aren't always wise and aware enough always to fully know the truth of a matter in and of themselves.

   I have had experiences like this plenty.  An example from the board.  A guy named Wonderer showed up, and started talking about ACIM.  I was a little curious why he would bring that up, but didn't question it too much, until some random guy named Andrew (i think) showed up a bit later out of the blue, with no prior post history, and raved about the awesomeness of ACIM and how he knew Wonderer.  This sort of odd occurrence made me suspicious about Wonderer and his intentions, thinking they were towards the negative.  It just seemed really weird how that happened like that.

     I brought it to meditation and to expanded guidance because i realized i could be wrong about it.  I was told by expanded guidance that he was a "rather old and loving soul." for the most part, and was honest and did not have bad intentions. 

   This of course was quite different than what my personalities mind and perceptions had started to think.  I trust my guidance because when i actually listen to same, i benefit, and i've had verification's in various areas.  Granted, it took awhile to build up this trust, and to more fully accept i was in touch with something bigger than the little self. 

   So, course i apologized to Wonderer, and felt bad for maligning him some.  Even got to know him a bit personally, as he was gracious and big enough to look past my original error.

  But it's especially important to check those outer sources that set themselves up as a spiritual authority.  Anyone can do the above with enough practice and with some attunement.  I've outlined a number of times here, a good combination for helping get started with that, with a combo prayer/affirmation combined with Bruce's remembering and feeling Love teaching. 

  Ultimately, that's all i personally want people to do, not to take my word for things, but to go within and directly get the info from the horses mouth, so to speak, of expanded guidance. 

    However, it doesn't seem too many people are interested in actually doing this.  Why wouldn't somebody who has, and who has been told a particular source is anything but helpful, not speak up about it? 

  Btw, personally speaking, i don't know of any more deeply limiting sources like ACIM.   I don't even put Seth into that category though i don't think it's from expanded guidance (it's very rare for expanded guidance to give earthly names to itself, with maybe the exception of Yeshua occasionally).  ACIM is so far in my experience, sort of unique in how it was set up, and in what it does of direct subconscious programming.  (as a book, i know there have been and are negative guru types out there that do this in various ways with people in person).

Justin, it was brought up and it was and is addressed.

If we are to have unlimited beliefs, attune more to love, discern in order to be unlimited and unstuck, then what is our definition of this, how do we do this?

Justin, spiritual improvement is worth working towards. I do think sources that care about our progress are careful about forcing help so that it doesn't become about them saying they know what is best for us, even if that might be; it is then not an active internal process for us making progress - by measuring, thinking and deciding ourselves. Aiding others with the best intended advice(s) for maneuvering in what can be a very confusing place is all good, but at some point pushing too hard it's not about advice anymore but being stuck as spiritual TSA officers and free will becomes limited. Misunderstandings happen and I and everybody I know make mistakes along the way.