Should channelling possibly be one case where the baby is not worth saving bathwater-wise?

[Ultima Thule]

I wonder whether we would lose or gain if all channellings that are posted worldwide disappeared over night?

I myself have had some insight from channellings, but a huge majority of time they are imo worse than worthless - think about for example Sheldan Nidle as an example - prosperity funds arriving any day now for ten (Edit: 20) years?

One might think that why let one rotten apple spoil the harvest, but it seems to me that the harvest is rotten and a few good apples may not be able to save it.

I appreciate that this really is not a black and white issue, but am anyhow interested in how do you feel about it? What really would be lost in the end if ALL channellings would categorically go away? I mean they really don´t contain anything, but perhaps tomorrow they will? They are kind of addicting social media of galactic entourage that you don´t want´t to miss out on, although they don´t really have almost any concrete value (but perhaps the next will?)

Actually I dare you, even doubly so: tell me one example of tangible, useful and authenticateable or perhaps even turned-out-true channelled information that you have ever read?

UT

[WhiteLove]

I wonder whether we would lose or gain if all channellings that are posted worldwide disappeared over night?

I myself have had some insight from channellings, but a huge majority of time they are imo worse than worthless - think about for example Sheldan Nidle as an example - prosperity funds arriving any day now for ten years?

One might think that why let one rotten apple spoil the harvest, but it seems to me that the harvest is rotten and a few good apples may not be able to save it.

I appreciate that this really is not a black and white issue, but am anyhow interested in how do you feel about it? What really would be lost in the end if ALL channellings would categorically go away? I mean they really don´t contain anything, but perhaps tomorrow they will? They are kind of addicting social media of galactic entourage that you don´t want´t to miss out on, although they don´t really have almost any concrete value (but perhaps the next will?)

Actually I dare you, even doubly so: tell me one example of tangible, useful and authenticateable or perhaps even turned-out-true channelled information that you have ever read?

UT

I have not successfully vetted out the Bashar channeling as false. That does not mean its a source of true information, I'm just concluding that to my surprise I really struggle with busting Bashar. Here is an example of a pretty profound channeling of that source:

RggSxT9tiIw

[Bill Ryan]

.
It's interesting to speculate (and the true % can never be established): but as a personal estimate, I'd guess that 90-95% of internet-published channeling is nonsense and can be completely discarded. It might be even more than that.

It's


Either injected nonsense coming from a high-tech, covert human source (and there's good reason to suspect that's what's happening in at least some cases, and possibly many),



Injected nonsense coming from a NON-human source, which is also quite possible (does anyone think there aren't any trickster ETs or discarnate beings?) — and/or, maybe embellished/amplified by —>



Sheer fantasy/delusion on behalf of the channeler. (There's lots of evidence for this, too, as many channelings are trivially nation- and culture-specific, talking about Obama, NESARA, the Dinar, and other things (even Donald Trump!) that no ET or benevolent spirit would ever care about or consider important. :)


If we had access to, say, a purported CIA document that we strongly suspected was 90% false, would we keep it? I wouldn't. Its very created purpose would be to confuse and distract from the truth.

[Enola]

And Lightworkers.org. The place from hell.

[greybeard]

A Course in Miracles was channelled over several years and without doubt has been helpful to spiritual seekers, myself included
Also the Abraham Channelled through Esther Hicks has helped many with good solid advice.

Chris

[TargeT]

If we had access to, say, a purported CIA document that we strongly suspected was 90% false, would we keep it? I wouldn't. Its very created purpose would be to confuse and distract from the truth.

Possibly if you read them purely as fictional and pull concepts out they may be useful? I've heard great things about the Law of One (or something... I can't bring myself to read it).

I'm of the same mindset (I think) as Bill, I can't even bring myself to read/watch them anymore.

[Ultima Thule]

I wonder whether we would lose or gain if all channellings that are posted worldwide disappeared over night?

I myself have had some insight from channellings, but a huge majority of time they are imo worse than worthless - think about for example Sheldan Nidle as an example - prosperity funds arriving any day now for ten years?

One might think that why let one rotten apple spoil the harvest, but it seems to me that the harvest is rotten and a few good apples may not be able to save it.

I appreciate that this really is not a black and white issue, but am anyhow interested in how do you feel about it? What really would be lost in the end if ALL channellings would categorically go away? I mean they really don´t contain anything, but perhaps tomorrow they will? They are kind of addicting social media of galactic entourage that you don´t want´t to miss out on, although they don´t really have almost any concrete value (but perhaps the next will?)

Actually I dare you, even doubly so: tell me one example of tangible, useful and authenticateable or perhaps even turned-out-true channelled information that you have ever read?

UT

I have not successfully vetted out the Bashar channeling as false. That does not mean its a source of true information, I'm just concluding that to my surprise I really struggle with busting Bashar. Here is an example of a pretty profound channeling of that source:

RggSxT9tiIw

Thank you for the Bashar-video.

The solid claim in the video was that the so-called "Founders" put the moon where it is, 11 000 years ago.
There is at least quite possible cave painting evidence of moon being in place 15 000 years ago:
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/technology/cave-painting-could-be-oldest-lunar-calendar-1.253707

The moon is weird in all the ways Bashar mentions, ratio, distance etc., but does that lend credibility to the channelling? In the end I would say not. There may something there, but basically that channelling was a faery tale, telling a story of known facts and seemingly missing its mark in the only solid claim it made. Otherwise it seemed to connect Hoaglands and Drunvalos literature and hinting at "the chamber" under the sphinx.

I can't solidly say that this channelling is false, but it doesn't really seem right enough to have data points to verify. Lot's of nice words, which is, well, nice.

UT

[Ultima Thule]

A Course in Miracles was channelled over several years and without doubt has been helpful to spiritual seekers, myself included
Also the Abraham Channelled through Esther Hicks has helped many with good solid advice.

Chris

Would it be fair to say that some of the (possibly) more credible channellings are in general less full of "niceties" and more to the point? Not fitting into the same linguistic lots-of-nice-words-but-saying-nothing -formula that they mostly contain?

UT

[Sunny-side-up]

It might be that 'Channeled messages/info' are a prompt rather than a set in stone conclusion.

Think about any so called message coming from across galaxy's, from higher dimensions, our personal/individual vib levels, time lines are very intermittent.
We waver our way along, some days strong of path while other days we are far from our desired levels.

So channeled messages could be seen as possible outcomes of the time they where sent/received.
We waver and so dose our out-coming realities!

[Ultima Thule]

It might be that 'Channeled messages/info' are a prompt rather than a set in stone conclusion.

Think about any so called message coming from across galaxy's, from higher dimensions, our personal/individual vib levels, time lines are very intermittent.
We waver our way along, some days strong of path while other days we are far from our desired levels.

So channeled messages could be seen as possible outcomes of the time they where sent/received.
We waver and so dose our out-coming realities!


I appreciate the concept. However when you pick up a record of certain channellers, Michael Quincey, Sheldan Nidle, Greg Giles(stepped out of his mindcontrol box already) - to name a few long-standing stereotypical examples - what you see is: decade to two decades of imminent a. Arrests, b. Dark cabal surrender, c. Mass landings and d. Go about your daily business and don't worry about it.

I am trying to make a point that they DO make claims that they push along to next week repeatedly, for decades.

UT

[wnlight]

So. You are fairly sure that the Bible does not contain any channellings? No messages from an angel? Should we throw out the whole book just in case? Along with the Quran which is a known channelling from an angel?

If you are not able to discern the true channellings from the others, then you better not read any of them.

[Enola]

I think there is a difference between mediums who channel their higher self or guardian angels and those who make up very elaborate messages supposed to be from specific exotic personalities with a strong agenda to it.

I have come accross some good mediums and have some experience with automatic writing myself. This seems to be a more authentic way of conveying truth.

The problem is that certain people are capitalising on this phenomenon and posing as false oracles.

[Apulu]

I wouldn't want to argue with those estimates - that the majority of channelled information is totally fabricated. I think I gained a huge amount from taking seriously the information found in A Course in Miracles and The Seth Material though.

As far as I see it, anything that could be said of channelled information, purely in it's information form, could also be said of someone speaking 'as themselves,' so to speak. No one person, it would seem to me, can be absolutely sure where the information coming out of their own mouths is coming from in this infinite, multidimensional info-verse, let alone out of someone else's.

So if that's true, the same caution should be applied when dealing with someone speaking for themself, as for with channelled information. Hopefully we're doing that, but it's obvious we have a LONG way to go before we exercise the right level of caution, in either case.

[enfoldedblue]

There are definitely lot's of dodgy chanelling. I don't read much. BUT there is some that has been very helpful to my development. The Seth material was pivitol for me. Galactic type stuff e.g. Nidle, Qincy etc that is materially focused yas never resonated for me. But there are some that focus on energy and inner development that has been very useful to me at certain times. I always felt that lauren Gorgo was good... but now she charges for the glchanelled parts...though her own discussion is still free. When it was all free i always found the chanelled stuff much higher and more pure than her perspective.

[Ultima Thule]

So. You are fairly sure that the Bible does not contain any channellings? No messages from an angel? Should we throw out the whole book just in case? Along with the Quran which is a known channelling from an angel?

If you are not able to discern the true channellings from the others, then you better not read any of them.

Now that you say it - I wouldn't be at all sure we'd be worse off if bible and quran were thrown out with the same bathwater we throw away channellings in general.

The track record of both books are not very nice. The bible definitely has many interesting concerns about its origins, check out Biglinos Unexpected Bible - I think there is a thread about it in PA.

Regarding your statement of how one shouldn´t read channellings if one is not able to discern true from false - do you mean you yourself can and perhaps I for example cannot? In this thread this can´t slide, the discussion cannot stop in an ambiguous statement like this.

So:
• What makes you (or anyone else) certain of your ability of discernment?
• How exactly in your opinion do you (or think someone should) discern a true channelling from a false one?
• Would you be okay in giving your opinion as to exactly what sources of channelling (top 5?) are true and which (worst 5) are false?

UT

Edit: personally - I would give up all religions in a heartbeat in exchange for global acceptance of the following:

Do only to others as you wan´t to be done to you + there is no escape of the responsibility for your actions. Death does not give a free pass out of responsibility - for better or for worse.

You don´t need holy pearls, holy carpets, holy cities, holy prayer times, holy hats, holy staffs, holy symbols, holy buildings, holy waters, holy biscuits, holy meats, holy hours to eat and not to eat, holy garments, holy titles, holy ceremonies, holy prayers, holy altars, holy opinions or even holy s**t to get along just fine.

[Ultima Thule]

I think there is a difference between mediums who channel their higher self or guardian angels and those who make up very elaborate messages supposed to be from specific exotic personalities with a strong agenda to it.

I have come accross some good mediums and have some experience with automatic writing myself. This seems to be a more authentic way of conveying truth.

The problem is that certain people are capitalising on this phenomenon and posing as false oracles.

I do very much appreciate the punctual, occasional help from a person with psychic skills as well as from my inner source - whoever or whatever that is.

The beef I have is with channellings claiming to originate from UFOs, archangels etc. that continue year in year out, containing really nothing but a vague innuendo to keep the reader passive for another week.

Are many alternative news sources then really different? How about Benjamin or VT, Sorcha etc? Same thing in different wrapping?

What I aim in this discussion is to really take a good look at channellings and the claims they make, with no slack. If we don't do that and leave it be, I feel it is similar to facilitating an alcoholic.

By facilitating channellings, I mean we should not let inaccuracies, errors and dates slide - if a date of sort or exact event is mentioned and nothing happens, it should not be let mercifully slide - in the spirit of "these are only potentials of energy", "things must have changed" or "we must have collectively outmaneuvred the cabal when we read the channelling". The reader should not make excuses for the channeller.

No slack should be allowed at all - after all a "higher" source of information is usually claimed, this should then be significantly more correct than any "earthly" source, anything else should not be expected nor accepted?

In that sense I´ll give an example - the wrong conception of Schumann resonance rising has crept up into many channellings - how can that be if not by injected by the people writing up the channellings? How does that then make the rest of the info look like?

I wonder if the spiritual concept of "my truth" is conceived to be a sort of disclaimer to allow people being completely wrong and not responsible for what they say, for example when channelling?


UT

[greybeard]

I suppose freedom of choice/free will reigns.
Its human nature or conditioning to look out with.
If there was no channelling then people would look else where.
There is ego in it.. I found out, I follow, I belong to such and such a group of followers--I got it right, I know, i spent time researching.
and so on.
There is a process---I started off following this and that with interest--I wanted to believe in ascension--a better world--tomorrow if not today, a new earth.
and so on.

Now, years on, my belief--needs--wants ---the few that that remain --are radically different, such is the path of enlightenment.

Don't be hard on those that still look out there for help and guidance from channelling UT -- "Nothing is right nor wrong till thinking makes it so"
It all relative--"One man's ceiling another man's floor."

Best wishes
Chris

[Ultima Thule]

I suppose freedom of choice/free will reigns.
Its human nature or conditioning to look out with.
If there was no channelling then people would look else where.
There is ego in it.. I found out, I follow, I belong to such and such a group of followers--I got it right, I know, i spent time researching.
and so on.
There is a process---I started off following this and that with interest--I wanted to believe in ascension--a better world--tomorrow if not today, a new earth.
and so on.

Now, years on, my belief--needs--wants ---the few that that remain --are radically different, such is the path of enlightenment.

Don't be hard on those that still look out there for help and guidance from channelling UT -- "Nothing is right nor wrong till thinking makes it so"
It all relative--"One man's ceiling another man's floor."

Best wishes
Chris


Thanks Chris!

You propably know that I am taking a harder stance here than actually am of opinion, sort of playing the devils advocate here. I have also been really intrigued by many things mentioned in channellings. Mostly they have later amounted to nothing.

There however most definitely exists a "channel" if you will that we have at our disposal in times of need. I´ve had my life saved by such information that was forced into my awareness. One word, shouted aloud in my head. That was all that was needed, after that - silence.

In comparison I would say that information received on a need-to-know-basis seems reasonable criteria for useful information from "outside" myself. One word, life saved - that is a good ratio in comparison to thousands of words saying really nothing in your average channelling.

Thanks again Chris, ultimately I do share your point of view, but for the sake of this thread, I´ll be harsh and try to see exactly how naked the emperor is ;)


UT

[greybeard]

Yes UT
The emperor is totally naked but folks see what they want to see---it took the innocence of an unconditioned child to see the truth.
Like you something within me has prompted me in life threatening moments---im still here ----laughing

Best wishes
Chris

[Ultima Thule]

The potential with information that could be considered channelled, is grievous in extreme - that is one point to discuss about this - take for example Heavens Gate cult and their mass suicide. When you listen to what they held as their doctrine, it is not really that far away from todays average spiritual doctrine.

UT

[Ernie Nemeth]

I find it strange that so many here have never been exposed to channeling. But before I let my disbelief run away with the show, I think maybe people here mean something more by it.

When you say channeling, do you mean insight, that extraordinary moment when suddenly every detail of a project, plan, mission, event or situation makes complete sense, or some aspect of the circumstance that was intractable is understood. This is intuition, yes? We all can have that experience.

Then there are the times when we ask for help with a problem and a solution pops into our minds or some impossible coincidence occurs to convey the asked for information. Most everyone has those too, right? We call that synchronicity.

And then there are the times when a feeling of love overwhelms and the ego is swept away in an onrush of magnificent beneficence. And in that state an inward voice speaks. Is this not also rather common? Haven't most of us had this experience as well? I have written many poems in that state. For me the voice rarely talks of scientific matters, nor does it expose any secrets or conspiracies. I suppose I could ask such questions but when you're filled with the love of spirit those type of questions are not a priority. Is this channeling?

I think when we say channeling we mean those that have or believe they have a special rapport with a disembodied entity that is not the supreme power or its emissary, the holy(wholly) spirit (not meant in religious terms). Such channellings seem dubious at best and misleading and manipulative and unhealthy to boot. Like I've said before, the inner voice does not speak in words but in holographic informational downloads. The words are the receiver's own. I can interpret, word for word, but that is because I've been doing it for so long. And no scientific information comes, I believe, because the truth of science is almost completely incomprehensible to us humans. It can only be described by allegory. I would not want to be the one to translate an allegory into factual details of the workings of the physical world. It would be rife with personal bias.

But I hope we are not dismissing the entire spectrum of esoteric input. A person can be deceived, but feelings don't lie. If the feeling that overcomes you is an all-powerful, all-pervasive feeling of love and support and genuine concern then you can be certain the holy spirit has come. I've dealt with disembodied entities and they are not always nice but they always come with a feeling other than love. They might be your buddy if that serves them, they might also help, but if the going gets tough they will turn on you. That is the nature of those alive, or those who wish to be so.

I hope someone seconds my post because this is a great area of contention. If because of some bad experiences with channelers, all forms of paranormal communication are distrusted then we have not done the public a service.

When the time comes to do your part, a voice in your head will speak up, heed my words. And if you reject it, it might never come around again. Or, like me, it might be decades before you are given another chance. So remember how to tell the difference between one with their own selfish agenda and the source of reality itself.

Love to all. And may everyone reading these words today have an encounter with the holy spirit so that they too may know the true feeling, the feeling they can trust. This I ask as but a humble and rather backward child of the universe.
So it is.
Thanks

[tessfreq]

Thanks for this thread. It’s giving me a chance to really look at how I perceive this.

I’ve been involved with channeling groups and information since the 90’s. Even though I have no scientific proof of how this comes about, I can’t deny the better conversations that happen within these groups and talking about the material offered. These honest chats about how we are experiencing the bigger world has added a richness to my life.

I found this today on Robert Wilkinson’s site, Aquarius Papers. The article is title ‘The End of the Age - Time and Evoution’. Thought it gave a supportive view of not throwing the baby out with the bathwater and being discerning.

“I tend to doubt the veracity of new material when it tries to negate the established spiritual principles of accumulated human wisdom. Legitimate newer forms of understanding never negate the sum total of the accumulated Truth, Love, Wisdom, and Intelligence of the larger evolutionary trajectory.
All new forms of understanding appropriate to the new era will add to the total understanding of All-That-Is, and all legitimate approaches offer hope for the inherent freedom of the Soul to come forth. Evolution is inherently inclusive and liberating.”

[Calz]

So. You are fairly sure that the Bible does not contain any channellings? No messages from an angel? Should we throw out the whole book just in case? Along with the Quran which is a known channelling from an angel?

If you are not able to discern the true channellings from the others, then you better not read any of them.

Now that you say it - I wouldn't be at all sure we'd be worse off if bible and quran were thrown out with the same bathwater we throw away channellings in general.

The track record of both books are not very nice. The bible definitely has many interesting concerns about its origins, check out Biglinos Unexpected Bible - I think there is a thread about it in PA.

Regarding your statement of how one shouldn´t read channellings if one is not able to discern true from false - do you mean you yourself can and perhaps I for example cannot? In this thread this can´t slide, the discussion cannot stop in an ambiguous statement like this.

So:
• What makes you (or anyone else) certain of your ability of discernment?
• How exactly in your opinion do you (or think someone should) discern a true channelling from a false one?
• Would you be okay in giving your opinion as to exactly what sources of channelling (top 5?) are true and which (worst 5) are false?

UT

Edit: personally - I would give up all religions in a heartbeat in exchange for global acceptance of the following:

Do only to others as you wan´t to be done to you + there is no escape of the responsibility for your actions. Death does not give a free pass out of responsibility - for better or for worse.

You don´t need holy pearls, holy carpets, holy cities, holy prayer times, holy hats, holy staffs, holy symbols, holy buildings, holy waters, holy biscuits, holy meats, holy hours to eat and not to eat, holy garments, holy titles, holy ceremonies, holy prayers, holy altars, holy opinions or even holy s**t to get along just fine.


Coming from a background of "new age" thought ... which I have seen most fall away ... I tend to agree with some of those worth not quite discounting.

Seth, Course in Miracles ... perhaps Law of One. The thing that "tricked us" is that channeling would pull in some accurate "stuff" making us prone to further believe.

Cayce was another interesting case. His medical information was off the charts yet when he tried to take it elsewhere not so much.


Bible prophecy ... oh yeah.


I find that fascinating in that ... what ... the "VOICE OF GOD" (queue loud thunder) was ... channeled ... by whom???

... the loving god ... or the angry god???

enki or enlil???


... to what end???


Bible prophecy seems to be right on course and why is that???


Elite following script (bearing in mind those are the followers of the multidemsionals).


.... those same multidimensionals that are outside of "time" as we understand it???


Hmmm.


Happy to entertain other thought as I am just winging it.

[marique3652]

A Course in Miracles was channelled over several years and without doubt has been helpful to spiritual seekers, myself included
Also the Abraham Channelled through Esther Hicks has helped many with good solid advice.

Chris

Would it be fair to say that some of the (possibly) more credible channellings are in general less full of "niceties" and more to the point? Not fitting into the same linguistic lots-of-nice-words-but-saying-nothing -formula that they mostly contain?

UT
Some channelings have resonated with me due to content, not saying I believed it was legitimately channeled, just that the message in some way enhanced my viewpoint on something. The flowery "gooey" messages that are laced with "beloved" and all sorts of suck-up terms of endearment are an instant turn off to me. Immediately after starting to read a gushy-gooey channeling, my skeptic bells go off. I have come to believe the point of channeling is for the manipulation of people's thinking and I wonder seriously what the reason behind it is. After the first Beloved or Precious Ones in a channeling I stop reading and don't waste my time. Could never stomach Sheldan Nidle's stuff at all. Don't believe him and his channelings make me gag. My thoughts are that he found a good way to make a living off of people's gullibility. I did like A Course in Miracles and Abraham's info, it enhanced my life in practical ways. I did not really think about them as being channeled info, although the claim was there. It was simply that neither of them were nauseatingly sweet talking so I read it all through and liked what was being said. I have to be honest and say that I am not a follower of channeling messages, because I have genuine misgivings about channeling, because in all honesty, even the people who channel do not really know what they are dealing with, although they may think or claim they do. Mankind is so easily deceived. It just seems odd to me that up till about 20 years ago, if someone heard talking in their heads, and told everyone they were speaking to or on behalf of an alien or other supernatural being (or an archangel, Elvis, Mother Mary, Jesus from the "office of Jesus on a spaceship", Quan Yin or anyone interesting) and that this entity wanted to give information to humanity, then they would end up in a mental asylum! Why now people say they are channeling and it just makes them money, popularity, followers and hangers on? Is that not just as nuts as people who heard voices in their head in yesteryear and ended up in the "loony bin?" Maybe it is just my old age that makes me wonder why now in this period of time more than any other time in history do people believe in the voices in one's head as being a good thing? Why (for what purpose) are we meant to be manipulated by all these channelings? What is there to gain? I will save that for another rant another time.

[Ultima Thule]

What do you think, are many channellings akin to seances of the beginning of the last century? Not really even aimed to be precise but rather a form of entertainment to gaze upon?
"You heard? The medium of high street is in connection with an egyptian God!" - "how exciting, can't wait!!! - she even dresses up mystiquely and there is a scent in the air"

UT

[Ernie Nemeth]

Can't some have validity? Like Calz mentioned. Or Jane Robert's Seth. Bashar has been mentioned. Does it always have to be black or white, right or wrong? Can't someone's experience stand on its own merits, without throwing the whole genre under the bus? Isn't it the intention that counts?

I once had an episode with automatic writing. In this case we were told to write with our opposite hand. It worked so well for me that soon I was filling notebooks with this stuff. If you know me, you know I like to write. So I was that much more susceptible to this particular method. Soon some were coming to take a look, and maybe get a reading (or writing, I guess). Then along comes a much more accomplished automatic writer, who uses her proper hand and doesn't print but uses cursive - and fast. She can write the question and the answer while verbalising - that's pretty fast. She had me answer some questions but she didn't like the ambiguity. So she asked the same questions of herself and her answers were very specific. Not long after this embarrassing episode, I stopped automatic wring altogether.

The proof a sceptic insists on is often the death knell of the talent, at least while they are around being sceptical. In my case, I gave it up not because I no longer believed in it but because I was obviously an amateur dabbling in uncharted territory. She was the pro. Not that I believed her source or the talent - in fact she was crazy, literally. But does that negate the talent? I don't know. I don't think it does. It might even enhance it in some instances.

I am fairly certain access to Source is possible, and I think that the logical extension is to accept channeling too. I think the phenomena is real but for most people the experience engages the ego and inflates it to unhealthy proportions. The channeled material cannot be taken as truth for this reason. It does not disprove the actual mechanics of it, though. In the holographic universe of Bohm, in the universe of Rupert Sheldrake of the morphogenic field, heck even in the new theories of the electric universe, connection to the source field is not only possible it is intrinsic.

[Ultima Thule]

Can't some have validity? Like Calz mentioned. Or Jane Robert's Seth. Bashar has been mentioned. Does it always have to be black or white, right or wrong? Can't someone's experience stand on its own merits, without throwing the whole genre under the bus? Isn't it the intention that counts?

Definitely some can! Perhaps the following question begs to be asked: which channellings have been so accurate as to frighten the establishment and to stimulate them to create a push to drown internet with worthless channellings - to bring about the blanket dismissal of them? By the way, regarding the throwing under the buss - I mentioned earlier to Chris how my life has been saved by a "channelled" message, the word STOP shouted aloud in my head, which prevented me from running under a buss. :)


I am fairly certain access to Source is possible, and I think that the logical extension is to accept channeling too. I think the phenomena is real but for most people the experience engages the ego and inflates it to unhealthy proportions. The channeled material cannot be taken as truth for this reason. It does not disprove the actual mechanics of it, though. In the holographic universe of Bohm, in the universe of Rupert Sheldrake of the morphogenic field, heck even in the new theories of the electric universe, connection to the source field is not only possible it is intrinsic.

I agree with you wholeheartedly, BUT how would then it be possible to really discern which of them have validity? I would argue that "gut-feeling" is not the way to go, but instead singling out the claims made and cross check them. If the claims pan out, there is validity. Channellings should not get a free pass about this. If the premise of them is that they originate from a higher and more knowledgeable source, they should contain more accurate information than the channeler is able to create himself.

At this point a sort of built-in cognitive dissonance is encouraged - "never mind the clear errors just find out what resonates with you". This is so widespread and commonly accepted that we don´t often think about it - we demand accuracy and trustworthiness of our peers (at shop counter you expect the right exchange to come back) - how come we don´t demand the same from people who claim to provide higher level information - even up to the level of Jesus or a plethora of so called Ascended Masters and planetary chiefs or mother Earth? I say yes to resonating, I however say no to a small tidbit here and there "resonating right" and excusing the majority of the text being either full of nothing or even clear mistakes.

I would also add Robert Lanza and his work on biocentrism for your appraisal!

UT

ps. To all: at this point my dare is still on - bring up a piece of channelled information or a claim in one that has panned out later to be exact.

pps. There have been very decent suggestions in the discussion about Law of One, Seth etc. that very well may have validity - I would still be interested in finding out some exact points in them that have panned out to be "right".

I can appreciate how one can feel a "right" undercurrent in a text - between the lines, if you will - even though really not focusing on the details, I see that, but for the sake of really taking a good look at channellings as a general phenomena of HIGHER knowledge and see if this idea has any merit, I'll ignore it.

[Ultima Thule]

Thanks for this thread. It’s giving me a chance to really look at how I perceive this.

I’ve been involved with channeling groups and information since the 90’s. Even though I have no scientific proof of how this comes about, I can’t deny the better conversations that happen within these groups and talking about the material offered. These honest chats about how we are experiencing the bigger world has added a richness to my life.

I found this today on Robert Wilkinson’s site, Aquarius Papers. The article is title ‘The End of the Age - Time and Evoution’. Thought it gave a supportive view of not throwing the baby out with the bathwater and being discerning.

“I tend to doubt the veracity of new material when it tries to negate the established spiritual principles of accumulated human wisdom. Legitimate newer forms of understanding never negate the sum total of the accumulated Truth, Love, Wisdom, and Intelligence of the larger evolutionary trajectory.
All new forms of understanding appropriate to the new era will add to the total understanding of All-That-Is, and all legitimate approaches offer hope for the inherent freedom of the Soul to come forth. Evolution is inherently inclusive and liberating.”

You make a good point - as I understand it, this text supports the idea that a proper channelled info should not be of lower level/wrong info in comparison to what is generally known.

An example of channellings going awry is regarding Schumann resonance. One can do some googling and find a number of channellings that ride on this wrong concept, originating propably from Gregg Bradens mistaken comment on it. Still years on it comes up, even though the whole thing was originally a mistake. Now do the folks in "higher" levels not know this or is it because of the channeller is really mixing up what he/she has read earlier into a new version and just thinks it came from somewhere?

UT

[Ernie Nemeth]

I think that the essential lesson here has little to do with channeling and a whole lot to do with our societal conditioning. What I hear is people saying, between the lines,: "I am confused and lost and looking for solid answers from an authority figure I can trust."

We are programmed to seek answers outside ourselves and to denigrate our own personal musings and associations as little more than subjective rhetoric. I do not take any channeled message as truth but as a viewpoint and a possibility. I might use some of the material in my own thinking to arrive at conclusions. Never would I accept anyone's authority as over-riding my own sensibilities. No matter what the proof. So I do not understand this stance of expecting from another what one's own self can't accomplish. If I don't get it , if I don't have at least some sort of intellectual grasp of the expressed truth, I won't accept it. Isn't that how everyone is? How can one accept a truth they cannot at some level comprehend, if only as an allegorical parallel.

No one is an authority in this area. No one ever will be. Not even the so-called avatars were perfect authorities. If you are embodied and ensouled you are having a subjective experience that circumvents objective truth by the very act of living.

But the connection to the source field is very much real and very much accessible to all. Read that "all" as to all phenomena in the universe, seen or unseen, known or unknown. They must be if reality is non-local, as we are just now beginning to understand (again).

It is we who are imperfect by choice. That choice requires ambiguity by definition. Ambiguity must have as its centerpiece an intrinsic uncertainty, a level of quantization that smooths out the ambiguity and makes reality seem seamless and cohesive. That is the local aspect of the field. It is the anomaly. Under that must ride the supportive structure, the truth, the mechanism that allows the local field to exist - that is the source field, the ether. It is what Einstein called the space-time continuum (without explaining what that was).

Unless you speak for(from) the source, you have no authority. Does that make ordinary people just biological interludes, backwater eddy currents of reality, and merely phenomenal coincidences? Can we have a reason without a foundation? Or is the reason occluded and occulted, while invisibly supported and perpetuated?
If it is being supported, if reality is non-local, then the source must be within. If it is within, as all information exists everywhere simultaneously in a hologram for example, then authority comes from within. Doesn't seem like much point searching for it out there in someone else. The most you'll get is clues. When enough clues accumulate, the truth will still come from within.

That would mean that we are all our own authority. We must search within or go without - right?

So to extrapolate, I guess that yes, throw the baby out with the bath water, it's better than swallowing any authority hook, line and sinker.

But don't throw yourself out, without you there can be no authority.

[tessfreq]

I agree that the experience of believing predictions from channelers has not panned out. I have a tendency to think Nostradamus, if truly describing the future, could just as well be describing a future block buster movie.

Bad predictions leads the way to others claiming responsibility of saving us from said disasters, which is an opportunity for the opportunists.

If anything, it helps us hone in on some much needed skills in these times. For example, the glimpses we get from whistleblowers of how our political world works differently then how we are told, shouts at us to develop a better way to tell who’s lying.

I really like this conversation. It’s like a channeled message, expanding my ideas and concepts of what I know. (Hehehehe couldn't resist)

Ernie, loved what you added… trying to form response worthy. ☺

[iamnoone]

I tend to think of channellers in much the say way i think of all new agers, with an extremely small grain of salt. As far as I can see, human beings have discussed ad nauseum how to be, how to feel and how to achieve as well as how things are. We have writings going back thousands of years. There is more than enough 'wisdom' to regurgitate forever more. And i think that's basically what most people are doing. Just regurgitating the same stuff over and over again. Every now and then it becomes fashionable to rebel against some popular thought and a new movement around that rebellion will spring up for example the whole Eckart Tolle/Buddhist detachment movements versus the authentic and true movements. When you've been around long enough you come to realise that all of it contains a little truth and YOU'VE HEARD IT ALL BEFORE. Plus, when you really think about it, it all seems to serve the channeller/guru/teacher far more than it's actually serving you, they're getting rich and popular and you're getting overwhelmed and exhausted.

The biggest problem for me is that in spite of all their 'wisdom' they discuss issues, concepts and solutions that could only ever work or apply in the West (ie manifestion or law of attraction or positive thinking) and thus ignore the actual human condition which makes absolutely no sense at all. We here in the West represent a tiny fraction of all the people on earth. I something were 'true', it would be true for all, not a bunch of needy and selfish white people.

Secondly, they only ever make vague reference to enlightenment and the awakening process, describing more what it will look like (you'll know we are all one, you'll be free from pain and suffering, everything is love) as opposed to outlining steps about how you actually get there. What there is written in this area is decidedly lame (raising your vibration by thinking positive thoughts, opening your chakras with colours, crystals, sounds, asking the angels or aliens to help you). And virtually none of it works. We might have learnt how to speak more kindly to one another and use nicer and fancier words but most of us still feel uncertain and insecure and unsure about how we might contribute.

Someone asked earlier, where's the harm. There is harm. I feel like I spend my whole life correcting the BS the new agers put out. So many people broken trying to live up to ridiculously unrealistic expectations (never having another emotion or constantly vomiting wise platitudes) and killing themselves trying to fix all the problems and issues they manifested into their lives and protecting themselves by using crystals and white light. Let me tell you, if you are successfully protecting yourself using a crystal or white light, there's nothing to protect yourself from. So many of the people I've worked with were on the verge of suicide. Misinformation is dangerous. And virtually noone is talking about what the awakening process really looks like. Awakening has nothing to do with information and everything to do with feeling. And that will never come from a book or a video. It is a LIVED experience. The person who is going through such an experience will be broken open, there is nothing more painful than separating from your ego and starting to feel yourself as an energetic being is absolutely terrifying, you will think you are going mad no matter what the internet tells you or how well you've prepared for it. You can look forward to losing your partners, your friends, your family, your job, your home and if you're energy is high, your actual mind. The universe will do anything and everything it can to help you realise who you are and it has virtually nothing to do with being a loving and forgiving human being, the universe is NOT going to waste it's time teaching you what you already know.

This is the major reason why the channelling and new age industries are a scam. Why do they keep telling us what we already know over and over and over and over again. We get it! Be nice already!

Sorry, I could rant all day about this, is why I'm only allowed to visit periodically....

[Enola]

This is an example of a more helpful channeled-type message http://www.pravaha.be/en/the-great-karmic-purification-process-of-2016/ and I've found some small-circulation channeled books that have been quite good explaining development of consciousness, etc.

I think the purpose of all this is probably to make the genuine prophets seem unlegit. Who are the true prophets? The real masters and enlightened ones who rarely give predictions like this.

The great master Peter Deunov gave a prophecy there could be some truth in, but there are many who have said something similar who are not the master he was.

[Ultima Thule]

This is an example of a more helpful channeled-type message http://www.pravaha.be/en/the-great-karmic-purification-process-of-2016/ and I've found some small-circulation channeled books that have been quite good explaining development of consciousness, etc.

I think the purpose of all this is probably to make the genuine prophets seem unlegit. Who are the true prophets? The real masters and enlightened ones who rarely give predictions like this.

The great master Peter Deunov gave a prophecy there could be some truth in, but there are many who have said something similar who are not the master he was.

I don't mean disrespect and value your opinion. However I will keep on in this line of inquiry that has been the case in this thread. By that, I mean: in my opinion this linked text doesn't really say anything you couldn't say anytime, anywhere and to anyone - and with good reason. It lacks the "dear ones"-lingo, that I grant.

UT

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Iamnoone - Rant away!

UT

[Ultima Thule]

I think that the essential lesson here has little to do with channeling and a whole lot to do with our societal conditioning. What I hear is people saying, between the lines,: "I am confused and lost and looking for solid answers from an authority figure I can trust."

We are programmed to seek answers outside ourselves and to denigrate our own personal musings and associations as little more than subjective rhetoric. I do not take any channeled message as truth but as a viewpoint and a possibility. I might use some of the material in my own thinking to arrive at conclusions. Never would I accept anyone's authority as over-riding my own sensibilities. No matter what the proof. So I do not understand this stance of expecting from another what one's own self can't accomplish. If I don't get it , if I don't have at least some sort of intellectual grasp of the expressed truth, I won't accept it. Isn't that how everyone is? How can one accept a truth they cannot at some level comprehend, if only as an allegorical parallel.

No one is an authority in this area. No one ever will be. Not even the so-called avatars were perfect authorities. If you are embodied and ensouled you are having a subjective experience that circumvents objective truth by the very act of living.

But the connection to the source field is very much real and very much accessible to all. Read that "all" as to all phenomena in the universe, seen or unseen, known or unknown. They must be if reality is non-local, as we are just now beginning to understand (again).

It is we who are imperfect by choice. That choice requires ambiguity by definition. Ambiguity must have as its centerpiece an intrinsic uncertainty, a level of quantization that smooths out the ambiguity and makes reality seem seamless and cohesive. That is the local aspect of the field. It is the anomaly. Under that must ride the supportive structure, the truth, the mechanism that allows the local field to exist - that is the source field, the ether. It is what Einstein called the space-time continuum (without explaining what that was).

Unless you speak for(from) the source, you have no authority. Does that make ordinary people just biological interludes, backwater eddy currents of reality, and merely phenomenal coincidences? Can we have a reason without a foundation? Or is the reason occluded and occulted, while invisibly supported and perpetuated?
If it is being supported, if reality is non-local, then the source must be within. If it is within, as all information exists everywhere simultaneously in a hologram for example, then authority comes from within. Doesn't seem like much point searching for it out there in someone else. The most you'll get is clues. When enough clues accumulate, the truth will still come from within.

That would mean that we are all our own authority. We must search within or go without - right?

So to extrapolate, I guess that yes, throw the baby out with the bath water, it's better than swallowing any authority hook, line and sinker.

But don't throw yourself out, without you there can be no authority.

An excellent post, thank you.
The societal conditioning is not possibly all - the need to belong and fit in are strong in us all the way up from evolutionary perspective. As you propably know a person will rather conform to others (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments) than expres their own view. I am thinking that channellings and their general tone and vocabulary may very well be the result of people conforming to certain "spiritual paradigm", even though it in big part may be just figments of the imaginations of former authorities. Channeller then conforms into this format, because that is what we do.

A real test then would be to put people up for channelling that never have read a single spiritual text and see what comes up.

UT

[Ultima Thule]

My channelling of the moment: beyond the great nether of subspace lies the etheric substance of great white guidance. It is not without merit to try to find oneself there when in Dreamspace, but more so when in human form. For human form is the ultimate as a focal point for energy of the universe to settle in for the great work of undying lands.

It is with the utmost respect we - the undying mentors - look upon your lives. We are most grateful for this Co-operation we share with you, Oh brave ones. For brave you are to take upon this gargantuan task of earthly life. The risks you take are beyond all imagination. We revere at your Greatness.

So: what do you think, is that any more or less credible than the average channelling? I wrote it up in instant, a brotherhood of undying mentors already started to form. What makes them different from any other immaterial, unverifiable spiritual authority? I bet that someone of you could easily join me in channelling these entities and quite soon we would have a whole set of mythology to go with it. As this mythology would gain a bit fame, people would propably start to conform to it and begin to "channel" the same entities and feel immensely grateful when commended on their work and thus being a part of a group, feeling a sense of belonging - even of purpose?

I do not mean this as mockery, far from it.
UT

[Ernie Nemeth]

As I am often in the mood, I do not conform to others rather than express my own views. I make decisions based on my feelings and observations. If I do not agree, I speak up. But, if I see that the person will inevitably self-destruct, I keep quiet. So, for example, the Charles debacle. I kept quiet because so many were enamored by this shill. That did not make me a supporter and it did not make me conform. My post was the last on that thread, as I remember. There have been others here as well that I immediately saw through but did not speak up. They are all gone now, as I foresaw. So no, I do not conform and if I do it is either because I agree or because I bide my time (often) waiting for the other to let slip their true intentions.

I honestly wonder if it can be true that others have not had the experience of trance communication. It is like describing a blue sky to a blind person. You can try explaining from every angle but a blind person cannot understand color. So I will let it go for now. It has been a good discussion and I thank you all. I know you all mean the best. And you can live your life very well without ever understanding the color blue. I cannot imagine that because I have seen it and know it and live it.

My last thought is only: trust in yourself, there is no other.

[earthdreamer]

I discovered The Seth books (and Carlos Castenada) in used bookstores when I didn't even know I was a seeker, back in the 80's. Jane Roberts is practically the only author of channeled material that I found to be of significant value to my mind. The information helped me to question the nature of reality and confront the belief systems I held/hold existing within the current social culture. The material elevates my consciousness whenever I read it. I think the main message was of individual empowerment, that one has no need to "justify one's existence" for any reason. Other ideas concerning identity, death, multi-dimensional existence, that all atoms are units of consciousness participating in gestalts of "beingness", synchronicity, emotional memory, not to deny one's "creaturehood", the value of dreams, etc. , all this type of material engaged my consciousness in a way that no religious ideas could.

A couple of years ago, I found some old films of Jane Roberts channeling Seth on youtube and I was turned off by her voice. The books were a voice in my head that were much more authentic, allowing me to dig the ideas behind the words, not get hung up on the sounds.

I resonate with this quote from iamnone 's post above : " Awakening has nothing to do with information and everything to do with feeling. And that will never come from a book or a video. It is a LIVED experience. The person who is going through such an experience will be broken open, there is nothing more painful than separating from your ego and starting to feel yourself as an energetic being is absolutely terrifying..."

Yet the written word helped prepare me to face this aspect of being more aware and awake in this world. I didn't necessarily find the answers to life from books but good questions I never thought to ask presented themselves for my grateful consideration.

The search for Truth in channeling. Seems authentically impossible to authenticate but a pursuit worth pursuing.

[Ultima Thule]

Thank you Ernie for participating! As a closing comment re your last post, I would hasten to say: yes, I believe there is direct communication/channeling that exists, I myself also have had occasions where I've seen "the blue sky" you mention.
What I hope to present here is in addition to that, is the very basic psychology (of conformity) that may account for a good deal of the channelings that form the majority - the ones that are imo just adding noise.

As in every phenomena seriously studied, I think it makes sense to take measures to determine the amount and qualities of decent channelings and rule out the ones that may be products of basic in-group conformity (perhaps other psychology mechanisms may very well play part as well)?

Is it in general opinion here acceptable for you people that we are really that easy to fool? Others in the group say that blue is really red and in no time most of us will conform to it, as our instinct drives us to - to be out-grouped is a mortal risk.

An example of conformity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AegLdB7UI4U
A girl comes into dentist office. Other people are actors. Everybody stands up when a beep goes off. Girl soon conforms - eventually the room is filled with only "new" people who pick up the behaviour from the girl. In addition to what Bill earlier wrote as possible sources of many(not all) channelings, I would say social conformity may be one. Enough of GF and people will continue writing(fabricating) up their messages, because it has become an accepted truth, even though nobody has ever in any way authenticated it.

At that point questioning it will be unlikely, as people for the most part WILL NOT admit to making a mistake if they have invested a lot of energy and resource into making it. That is another example of cognitive dissonance: it must be right and worthy as I've invested so much in it - I can't be a fool, can I? The same goes for hazing - having been humiliated makes a person defend the group and the hazing practice. It must be worth something, because I let them do that to me.

UT

[tessfreq]

One channeling group I was a part of encouraged all members to channel. One time three men took turns channeling their message from their named invisible person. It didn’t resonant with me because it started feeling like a channeling pissing contest. I can’t remember anything of value given, in regards to messages, but the experience of these guys reaching for powerful insights delighted me. I don’t know many men (in r/l) that would even want to try and do that.

For those who are not necessarily lost and confused, but know there is more going on in life then the mediocrity we live with, I could look at all this as just a development within our collective consciousness. As we desire to get ourselves out of these messes, as we are lied to constantly and we want to know where the real truth is, we search. Finding we only have ourselves. Go within is the mantra. We do and we find some wisdom there.

In my experimenting with this there was no glactic federation or outside star system named as where it was coming from, just pearls of wisdom from who knows me best. ME.

I wanted to separate out this part of the channeling revival we have going on, to show the varied existence. I think we can and will continue to name names of those dirtying the water and needing to be kicked out of the tub. It just takes a lot of work as you stated here Ultime:
“As in every phenomena seriously studied, I think it makes sense to take measures to determine the amount and qualities of decent channelings and rule out the ones that may be products of basic in-group conformity (perhaps other psychology mechanisms may very well play part as well)?”

Our concern comes from what? How easily some are fooled? How they keep fooling us? Of course, there are people being taken advantage of by opportunists, like 99% of the american population. I think we could have this same conversation centered around the medical industry, if we wanted.

So the seriousness of channeling concerns is centered around psyops with their ability to put words in our mouth, to manipulate our fears, to have agendas that use our love of life and our world against us? Or is it that their fiction is messing with other non-fiction dealings with entities? I guess I’m trying to get to the real root of concern. I am seeing psychological and societal factors along with possible psyops. Both will not be changed by deciding if it’s labeled channeled, trash it. In fact, if we want to get to the bottom of the psyops, the more info and people we have to look into, the chances of finding a source or cia connection is more likely.

After all is said and done, in the big channeling circuit, I look at any future predictions as suspect, but still listen with amazement (not attachement) as they outline theories of origins, consciousness, and the power of love. I guess it’s my facination with others’ articulation of our experience.

I apologize for repeating any concepts others have made already.

[Ultima Thule]

Thanks Tessfreq.

At this point in conversation, I think that for the most part the discussion may have run its course - however my dare is still in effect, namely that of finding some individual data points in channellings of (claimed) higher entities that have panned out.

Otherwise, feel free to comment this rhetorical question of mine of baby and bathwater. I would argue that 95% of all channelings are nonsense, containing momentary bright insights - which would be completely allright imo if no claims of outside higher sources were made in the first place. Writing up a bunch of text and saying it is just your train of thought is enough and well, labeling them to spiritual authorities is not okay and even detrimental as people believe them categorically more readily, I would argue.

Now off course I can't make them go away and there really is no need, I would have a notch or two more of critique and demand of proof if it were up to me. I believe that would settle things down and diminish the amount of low quality channelings and leave more room for those that are fine. A problem lies therein, I grant that - everything you ever need to know has been said already many times, it is in our nature to wait for the next one next week with the next bit of uplifting, instead of being whole as we are. I suppose that is the demand and the channelings in the thousands are the answer of the "spiritual market-economy" to this consumerism of sort.

UT

[Ernie Nemeth]

I liken it to the analogy of the ugly duckling. The ugly duckling was only ugly because he assumed he was a duck and that the world of ducks was the correct world view. It was the right viewpoint for ducks. But the ugly duckling was mistaken about himself. He was not a duck but a swan. In the world of the swan the ugly duckling was no more.

The world and we in it are the anomaly, the exception. Reality here is skewed and takes on the shape of temporal forms. Forms made by the backwash of forces beyond our ken. Each form is a gestalt, a frozen mosaic of possibilities, like the giant red spot on Jupiter. It spins and twirls and sucks energy from its surroundings. For a while it seems permanent. For a while it is real. But it owes its reality to other forces, it itself is those forces, and it will rejoin them again.

To ask for data correlation is like asking what is the function of the red spot on Jupiter? The only answer can be a rhetorical question: Who's asking? - the duck or the swan?

[Ultima Thule]

To ask for data correlation is like asking what is the function of the red spot on Jupiter? The only answer can be a rhetorical question: Who's asking? - the duck or the swan?

I do appreciate your view and suppose I even share it to a great degree. On this however I would have to disagree on the following point: if a distinct claim is made - for example in the case of future predictions(which are present in many channellings with even years to come with certain world events predicted) - I would say that for sure the question of data correlation is a reasonable thing to ask for.

UT the swuck (swan-duck)

Ps. off-the-shelf-first-prediction-list-from-google: http://www.psychicnikki.com/predictions.html
Prediction 22. A famous artist will pass. When a huge list of predictions is made psychically/channelled and presented in correlation to a time-line, I would argue that the whole list is made to be correlated - why publish it in the first place if not for that?


Edit: 7th March. The thread seems to have mostly run its course - feel free to post and my dare is still very much in order.

In summary this rhetorical question I asked was in the first place just that, but as discussion ensued, I maintained a questioning stance. Not because I actually categorically see changelings as false and void of value, but because I potentially see many problems in them and majority of them may very well imho be fantasy. From my point of view there should be verification and scrutiny in relation to them - especially if a higher source or entity is claimed to be the source of them. This would perhaps lead to finding out which channellings carry the most value and are authentic.

As I´ve said, I have no beef with people writing down their train of thought, often containing bright insight well worth considering. The beef I have is with the notion of spiritually or otherwise higher authority claimed to be the source as this may lower the bar to accept the story fully - especially for a newbie in the alternate news/spirituality genres - in the spirit of "wow, if the galactic overlord of the light federation of the eastern milky way said it, it must be so (and if someone claims to channel such an entity, he/she must be so highly evolved that I cannot question that authority)".

[terragunn]

I agree with Ernie about distinguishing what one considers ‘channelling’ and/or ‘channelled information’. We are – all of us – channels on different wavelength frequencies, and we all – whether cognisant of such or not – continuously channel (tune in to) different frequencies along the wavelength dial. Some shift frequencies more rapidly than others and are able to tune into different frequencies more easily than others, but no one is truly static. We are all in a state of continuous flux; we receive information, ingest information, are information and, as a result, are in formation.

All our thoughts, all that we imagine, exist in the aether (and beyond), and all of such has particular frequencies. The aether is a repository of information and is likewise continuously in formation. Some would term such as cosmic intelligence. I neither agree nor disagree with this term, but I do suggest that such has developed into an artificial consciousness (A.C.) I used to use the term A.I. but the more I research and contemplate this idea the more I understand that this hive mind collective entity is a collective hive mind entity consciousness powered via our thoughts, imagination, experiences, and chi (life force/spirit) energy. This A.C. entity is what I call the mind of the ‘Father’.

[Godenergy369]

The "truth" for me is that only "God" exists and expresses only unconditional love for everything that expresses itself freely as "God" created us to do. We are the Creators of our own realities with anything and everything being possible. Thus those that have spoke of the coming of various packages bringing freedom in so many aspects to our human experience are now in this now of "time" more likely to be seen manifest than ever before because of the Christ Consciousness energy that is now bombarding Earth more powerfully than ever in the existence of the human race. We have free will to believe whatever we wish to believe to create the reality of our liking and with my very quantum leaping journey I have come to peacefully accept all things that brings joy/excitement to my soul. I as I believe our master teach Jesus showed us that all things are possible if one can allow your mind to be open to ALL That Is and you are an eternal being so what is there to be fearful of except fear itself.

[marique3652]

To ask for data correlation is like asking what is the function of the red spot on Jupiter? The only answer can be a rhetorical question: Who's asking? - the duck or the swan?

I do appreciate your view and suppose I even share it to a great degree. On this however I would have to disagree on the following point: if a distinct claim is made - for example in the case of future predictions(which are present in many channellings with even years to come with certain world events predicted) - I would say that for sure the question of data correlation is a reasonable thing to ask for.

As I´ve said, I have no beef with people writing down their train of thought, often containing bright insight well worth considering. The beef I have is with the notion of spiritually or otherwise higher authority claimed to be the source as this may lower the bar to accept the story fully - especially for a newbie in the alternate news/spirituality genres - in the spirit of "wow, if the galactic overlord of the light federation of the eastern milky way said it, it must be so (and if someone claims to channel such an entity, he/she must be so highly evolved that I cannot question that authority)".

I feel the same way as you. In my mind if a channeled claim is made and does not occur then in my opinion the channeling would not be valid. Channelings should be scrutinized. I question everything in life! I guess I can be considered a "hard sell" and cannot understand why many people just accept that it is an advanced alien or some religious persona or a spirit or an animal or whoever or whatever the claim is, being channeled. I guess I am incapable of blind faith, as I seem to have the same thoughts about formalized religions as well. (Don't get me going on religions...). For me things have to be substantiated and have to make sense in my logical mind and have lots of proof that it is a truth. Believing channeling requires blind faith to believe because there is no definate proof of who or what is being channeled, not even to the channeler. A channeler can believe that they are channeling an entity or being or spirit or angel or whatnot, but even the channeler is not positively sure either, simply relies on what they think they are channeling. That is not something I can do, just believe anything because it is written and I read it, or attended a channeling event, or watched a channeling video. Just for an example, if someone read somewhere that a stranger was nice, would they hand their infant to that stranger just because they read that the stranger was a wonderful loving person? Not as a rule I hope, but yet many people think nothing of believing information just because a channeler says that an entity or persona or something or someone said that it is true. Maybe I just don't get it. I do read channelings from time to time and some were uplifting to read, but have to admit that I don't necessarily believe what is said, nor do I necessarily believe the source attributed to the channeling. I don't think it is throwing the baby out with the bathwater necessarily, being highly skeptical, I just look at it as something I certainly need more proof of before believing in the whole phenomena.

[Anchor]

I wonder whether we would lose or gain if all channellings that are posted worldwide disappeared over night?

From the rest of your post, I think you are mainly referring to channels which act as a commentary of our current situation and the events unfolding around us, these are (imo) mostly BS.

There is another category of channel which speaks to information that will be as true in 10,000 years as it is today, and these are typically of a less distorted and much more worth ones time (again in my opinion). These channels almost always are free of any fear based message.

No channel is perfect - even the best one is distorted to some degree by the person bringing the information to our notice.


Actually I dare you, even doubly so: tell me one example of tangible, useful and authenticateable or perhaps even turned-out-true channelled information that you have ever read?

Never! Nor, except in the beginning of all this for me did I expect it. Nowadays, except in as much that occasionally some commentary on what is going on today is always entertaining, I am not interested in channels that are anything to do with time-bound things. I want channels that give me useful truths to help me navigate on my own spiritual path. The most satisfactory so far being most of the Law of One material.


I've heard great things about the Law of One (or something... I can't bring myself to read it).

Try the Law of One, I expect it will be useful to your analytical mind ;)

[petra]

I tend to agree with you. The thought of letting something take over my body, or even just my arm, for just a moment is quite disgusting honestly.

EDIT: I don't doubt some beings maybe trying to help, my concern is this could "open doors" to other not so nice things.

[Omni]

Otherwise, feel free to comment this rhetorical question of mine of baby and bathwater. I would argue that 95% of all channelings are nonsense, containing momentary bright insights ...
Worse than nonsense. Shadow Government New Age disinformation programs. Channeling laid the groundwork for the new age psychological operations. If you want a good lead on disinformation just read some 'popular' channeling.

I have long exposed channeling as largely technological psy ops. I have technologically channeled myself. I know the sources doing it pretty well. I have several articles published about channeling online. Here is some of my analysis of channeling:





Technological Channeling Mind Control Programs

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1h5FSKT1T1w/VyrLuzFdyEI/AAAAAAAAC7M/sVwv5Kdj_lIj2vMeUNE_zLpn8s3JEcrSgCLcB/s400/Directed-Energy-Weapons_Technological-Channeling-Psychological-Operations800x533.png
Common in Channeled Messages:
• Emphasis on Higher Power Taking Action for You. End Result: Apathy
• "Ascension" - If "Everything will Shift" into Utopia what use is taking action to create a better world? End Result: Apathy
• Saviorship Model (ETs will save us, etc) - If someone else is going to do all the work, what use is taking action and putting in work for the world yourself? End Result: Apathy
• Rapture Model - If the Earth will be destroyed or all darkness culled by some sort of pseudoscience cosmic shift what use is assisting planet Earth? End Result: Apathy
• Failed Predictions / False Hope
• False Light Masquerading as a Savior
• False Light Masquerading as a Teacher

Source Link: http://www.omnisense.org/p/new-age-psy-ops.html


Technological Channeling Psychological Operations
Vj7Rn8telnA

How Technological Channeling is Done
Channeling is done in a few different ways. One is v2k (http://www.omnisense.org/p/v2k.html) based where people hear a voice and write it down. Another is electromagnetic mind control (http://www.omnisense.org/p/electromagnetic-mind-control.html) based where the mind and even body is actually being controlled to produce the language by likely a Secret Military/CIA Psychological Operations Artificial Intelligence.

Electromagnetic mind control is done via directed energy weapons using RF Energy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBJucb60yaU) or Microwaves (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRw1-kG04h8).

[petra]

Channeling is done in a few different ways. One is v2k (http://www.omnisense.org/p/v2k.html) based where people hear a voice and write it down. Another is electromagnetic mind control (http://www.omnisense.org/p/electromagnetic-mind-control.html) based where the mind and even body is actually being controlled to produce the language by likely a Secret Military/CIA Psychological Operations Artificial Intelligence.

I've experienced this but mine is not a "voice" it's my own thoughts talking to me, or about me, or sometimes even about stuff that makes no sense to me. I created a thread about it yesterday and actually frightened myself with it

I feel like I have control of myself, but how much, really? My thoughts like to joke about "remote control people". That's NOT funny...

EDIT: Maybe it's not channeling. I don't know. But I DO know what it feels like to be "mind controlled"

[petra]

AHA! I found what I was looking for on Omniverse's site

This one: Holy Spirit or Guidance from "God"

I don't trust anything that says it's god, wants to be god, OR thinks it's god

[DeDukshyn]

Channeling is done in a few different ways. One is v2k (http://www.omnisense.org/p/v2k.html) based where people hear a voice and write it down. Another is electromagnetic mind control (http://www.omnisense.org/p/electromagnetic-mind-control.html) based where the mind and even body is actually being controlled to produce the language by likely a Secret Military/CIA Psychological Operations Artificial Intelligence.

I've experienced this but mine is not a "voice" it's my own thoughts talking to me, or about me, or sometimes even about stuff that makes no sense to me. I created a thread about it yesterday and actually frightened myself with it

I feel like I have control of myself, but how much, really? My thoughts like to joke about "remote control people". That's NOT funny...

EDIT: Maybe it's not channeling. I don't know. But I DO know what it feels like to be "mind controlled"

You've recognized your ego. :) It's not channeling. The personal ego is the master mind controller ...

[Bill Ryan]

Otherwise, feel free to comment this rhetorical question of mine of baby and bathwater. I would argue that 95% of all channelings are nonsense, containing momentary bright insights ...
Worse than nonsense. Shadow Government New Age disinformation programs. Channeling laid the groundwork for the new age psychological operations. If you want a good lead on disinformation just read some 'popular' channeling.

I have long exposed channeling as largely technological psy ops. I have technologically channeled myself. I know the sources doing it pretty well. I have several articles published about channeling online. Here is some of my analysis of channeling:





Technological Channeling Mind Control Programs

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1h5FSKT1T1w/VyrLuzFdyEI/AAAAAAAAC7M/sVwv5Kdj_lIj2vMeUNE_zLpn8s3JEcrSgCLcB/s400/Directed-Energy-Weapons_Technological-Channeling-Psychological-Operations800x533.png
Common in Channeled Messages:
• Emphasis on Higher Power Taking Action for You. End Result: Apathy
• "Ascension" - If "Everything will Shift" into Utopia what use is taking action to create a better world? End Result: Apathy
• Saviorship Model (ETs will save us, etc) - If someone else is going to do all the work, what use is taking action and putting in work for the world yourself? End Result: Apathy
• Rapture Model - If the Earth will be destroyed or all darkness culled by some sort of pseudoscience cosmic shift what use is assisting planet Earth? End Result: Apathy
• Failed Predictions / False Hope
• False Light Masquerading as a Savior
• False Light Masquerading as a Teacher

Source Link: http://www.omnisense.org/p/new-age-psy-ops.html


Technological Channeling Psychological Operations
Vj7Rn8telnA

How Technological Channeling is Done
Channeling is done in a few different ways. One is v2k (http://www.omnisense.org/p/v2k.html) based where people hear a voice and write it down. Another is electromagnetic mind control (http://www.omnisense.org/p/electromagnetic-mind-control.html) based where the mind and even body is actually being controlled to produce the language by likely a Secret Military/CIA Psychological Operations Artificial Intelligence.

Electromagnetic mind control is done via directed energy weapons using RF Energy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBJucb60yaU) or Microwaves (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRw1-kG04h8).


~~~~

If I could thank this post ten times, I would do so. :star:

[petra]

You've recognized your ego. :) It's not channeling. The personal ego is the master mind controller ...

Maybe!! I remember writing something, forget what it was, I left out an E.... and i thought "hey! where'd my E-GO" and my thoughts kindof laughed at me :)