I want to start a thread about how RSE has misled it's students into believing that there is reincarnation, there is no hell, and that there is no such things as a devil etc I attended an event at RSE at the encouragement of a family member and I was shocked with what was taught.

I find it particularly appaling that they claim that Jesus was just one son of God and that we are all sons and daughters of God!!!

They claim the devil doesn't exist. I wonder what motivation is behind that teaching?

J--May I suggest to you the books of Brian Weiss, M.D.? Here is a brief introduction from Amazon.com for his first book, Many Lives, Many Masters:

"Psychiatry and metaphysics blend together in this fascinating book based on a true case history. Dr. Weiss, who was once firmly entrenched in a clinical approach to psychiatry, finds himself reluctantly drawn into past-life therapy when a hypnotized client suddenly reveals details of her previous lives. During one hypnosis session his client introduces the spirit guides who have been her soul therapists in between lives. This is when the story really takes off for Weiss, who discovers that these guides have specific messages about his dead son as well as Weiss's mission in life. No, we cannot verify the truth of this story using the limited scientific tools we have available. However, it is hard to dispute that this well-respected graduate of Columbia University and Yale Medical School has discovered a personal truth that has led him to be an enormously popular speaker, author, and leader in the field of past-life therapy."

The message about Dr. Weiss' dead son was incredibly specific--the child had died of an extremely rare ailment that Dr. Weiss' patient couldn't possibly have known about.

When Dr. Weiss began researching reincarnation, he found much credible evidence from other reputable scientists. I, for one, have my own personal knowledge that I have other lives.

My own truth is that a loving God would never consign any of the beings that He created to everlasting fire and brimstone. No loving human father would ever punish his child for a mistake by throwing him into a pit of fire. Doesn't God's love far surpass the love of a human father?

How then can we explain people's experiences of encountering demons, or why would God allow the Holocaust or any form of suffering in this world? Why, for example, would God allow a baby to live for a short while, then die of cancer? My own belief is closely matched to the explanation found in Conversations With God, Books 1-3, which I highly recommend.

J (I don't believe that Jesus was the only Christ so I will not use your handle)--Have you conducted your own extensive research into beliefs that you reject, such as reincarnation? If not, then aren't you just as indoctrinated as many RSE students?

onehand,

I will definately read your recommendations. In fact, I have been drawn to reading the Conversations with God book for some time now. Somehow I keep running in to people that recommend that I read this book.

What do you think about the idea that JZ is possessed by the devil. If that is true than can we trust anything that comes out of her mouth?

I suggest that all of you Christianity adherents do a little research into the god-man crucifixion and resurrection myths that far predate Jesus.

Just to ease you into it, start here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ-kvw1fYXs

Then read this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Christ-Conspiracy-Greatest-Story-Ever/dp/0932813747

J, I'm packing for a trip so can't give more than a quick response. I think it makes sense to look to the simplest, most common-sense answer first. A friend of mine used to know a man who worked for JZ way back before "Ramtha's" first appearance. JZ told this man that she'd found a way to make a lot of money, and this man also said that JZ was taking acting lessons. A former RSE security guard told me and others that he witnessed JZ just about to enter the arena, chatting to someone else as JZ, then saying "oops" and switching to the Ramtha persona just before she entered the arena. So maybe that's what we have here, just a longstanding con game.

As for "the devil" possessing anyone, if there is such an entity, and he wanted to hurt the greatest number of souls he could, why would be bother with JZ? Maybe he'd possess someone who could send thousands of low-income young people to get killed in a war under false pretenses, and maybe at the same time, he'd possess the leaders on the other side, so the fighting would never end.

My personal observation is that I cannot trust anything that comes out of JZ's mouth. Psychology calls it pathological lying.

Can anyone tell the difference between "past lives" and multiple personality? Both describe the same phenomenon.

Hi Virtual,

Since you did ask the question, I refer you to Brian Weiss, M.D. at www.brianweiss.com. The man's credentials as a psychiatrist--Columbia, Yale, etc.--and his research as an initial skeptic are pretty impressive. Could multiple personality explain how a little kid could knock on your door claiming to be your reincarnated grandfather (hypothetical example) and not only know everything about you, but could pick out his own former possessions from a box of miscellaneous items? Such things have happened...credible scientists have done the research. Dr. Weiss names some of them in his first book. A friend of mine, a clinical psychologist for over 30 years, has studied directly with Dr. Weiss and found him sincere and a dedicated researcher.

If you truly want to know the answer to your question, you can consult the same research and sources Dr. Weiss did. The question is, will you?

one hand says:

"If you truly want to know the answer to your question, you can consult the same research and sources Dr. Weiss did. The question is, will you?"

You sound like you are the judge and jury of "truly" I would say, if you walk your talk yyou might get some insight from the conversations here:
http://skepdic.com/comments/pastlifecom.html

To suggest to someone that they only follow the research and sources of on person explaining strange and weird occurances is quite limiting (IMHO)

Journey,
I did not "suggest to someone that they only follow the research and sources of on (one?) person..." The information Dr. Weiss found when he looked for past-life information from trained scientists came from many different people. So as I recall, his book has a bibliography of many scientists and researchers who have investigated the question of other lives. This bibliography would be a good resource for anyone who wants to look into this subject with an open mind.

I don't understand your perception of me as "judge and jury" as I haven't accused anyone of anything.

onehand: I read Dr Weiss' stuff years ago when he first hit the New Age conference circuit. After I read your post I looked over his website again and intensive workshop offerings. Much of what he is doing appears to be Dick Sutphen recycled http://www.dicksutphen.com/
---not much new here. Sutphen used to charge a few hundred dollars a person (1982) for past life regression therapy (imagine dozens of folks laying on a floor going through hypnotic regression and having "incredible past-life memory experiences" and then "sharing" with one another after each session. My ex-wife and her then husband took one of those workshops. They were not too impressed.

I'm not going to go into it here, but Weiss is hardly convincing...his so-called proofs are pure anecdote to me. But the real proof of what he is all about is in his following: look where he took this--right into the New Age/ 'metaphysical' circuit--same crowd that Sutphen mines for his living.

Reincarnation seems to explain some things if you believe in a cyclical universe, but it does not mean that a specific identity or personality reincarnates like a cosmic clone. Personally, I find the lstter concept childish and creepy any more (I too once believed).

One last comment:
When I was a devotee of the "I AM" books by Guy and Edna Ballard (Guy aka Godfre Ray King, Unveiled Mysteries (1934) Magic Presence (1935?)) I read his 3rd book also that was channeled dictations from Ascended Master Saint Germain. St Germ. among Theosophists was Sir Francis Bacon reincarnated and the same Theosophists believe that Bacon wrote the Shakespeare plays and sonnets. One reason that I rejected the I AM and related channeling cults was this Shakespeare connection.
I found 14 people who channeled St Germain by 1983 before I quit looking. I wondered how come, in several hundred years of "adeptship" Shakespeare managed to get so crude and inept with the English language? The channelers to the person lack the beauty, nuance and wonderful turns of phrases that the real Shakespeare (not Bacon) commanded.

And look what happned to Ramtha after 35,000 years...science stilted, socially compromised by a trademark, and still an alcoholic.


Joe

from
http://skepdic.com/comments/pastlifecom.html

"9 Jan 2004
I'm curious to know, in your conclusion of past life regression, how you would explain how people under hypnosis recite elements from certain periods without ever learning them in their current lifetimes. Or how one speaks other languages under hypnosis or from hypnosis. The book Many Lives, Many Masters by Brian Weiss, MD gives complete proof of past lives and their benefits. Even he was a skeptic beforehand. There is just too much evidence to prove it right. As a skeptic, with all due respect, maybe you're just being skeptical for the sake of being skeptical.

Chris Sack

reply: Before offering my explanations, I want to state that it would be fruitless to try to explain away every weird thing people experience. There is no limit to the number of theoretical explanations for any event; so, theoretically I ought to be able to offer several zillion alternative explanations for these "facts" mentioned by Mr. Sack. Not all would be equally plausible, however. But even if I produced just one plausible explanation that didn't involve spirits or reincarnation, I doubt if I could ever satisfy Dr. Weiss or Mr. Sack. And, even if I did satisfy them on one count, there is an endless number of weird things they could continue to bring up, asking me about each one: How do you explain that? I don't claim to have an explanation for everything, but some things are not that difficult to explain.

I don't believe people under hypnosis can recite anything they have not learned in this lifetime. If a recitation or speaking a foreign language takes place under hypnosis, as it did with Virginia Tighe (Bridey Murphy), the subject learned the recitation in this life. The subject may not remember learning the recitation or may not reveal to the therapist that she does remember, but of all the various possibilities that I can imagine, the most plausible is that the subject learned the recitation in this lifetime. Other possibilities are that aliens are controlling her mind and feeding her the lines like a ventriloquist with a dummy; God is speaking through her; she is telepathically picking up the recitation from someone else on this or some other planet; she was born with these lines in her soul or brain and something about hypnosis triggered the release of them to her conscious mind; or, well, you get the picture.

I don't claim that reincarnation is impossible. However, the kind of evidence Dr. Weiss and others like Mr. Sack are convinced by seems very unconvincing to me. I understand that Dr. Weiss had some personal experiences involving his dead son, colleagues, and patients that he felt could only be explained by reincarnation. However, once he accepted that belief, it was relatively easy for him to find confirming evidence of it everywhere he looked.

I don't believe in reincarnation, so, unlike Dr. Weiss, when I hear weird stories that somebody thinks can only be explained by reincarnation, I look for alternative explanations. If I can't find one, I don't assume that reincarnation is true. I assume that I don't have all the facts or that I am just not clever enough to figure out what is going on.

Given what we know about memory, hypnosis, and confirmation bias, and given what we know from cases like Bridey Murphy and Jenny Cockell, reincarnation is not the most plausible explanation for the kinds of weird things mentioned by Mr. Sacks and Dr. Weiss."

Joe Sz,

To comment on your post from April 9, 12:09 a.m.:

My perception is that you dismiss things by either 1) bringing up something else to which they don’t relate, or 2) saying they relate to New Age or metaphysical as if that is an automatic put-down, or 3) bringing up information that isn’t really accurate.

Here’s an example of #1:
Joe, you said: “Much of what he is doing appears to be Dick Sutphen recycled ---not much new here.”

I never said that Dr. Weiss was doing anything new, or that he needs to be doing anything new (he doesn’t). The concept of reincarnation and other lifetimes (past if time is linear; simultaneous if it is not) has been around for a long time. My point was only that Dr. Weiss is a Columbia and Yale-trained scientist who found merit in investigating the past-life phenomenon and discovered there is much evidence from trained researchers to support its veracity.

Your statement also sounds a bit condescending to me. Why? Not to attack anyone’s religion, but one could just as easily go to a seminar on one of the established religions and say, “Much of what [the father or priest or rabbi] is saying appears to be [insert name of a former religious leader] recycled—not much new here.” See how “not much new” is irrelevant and is used as though it is a put-down?

Here’s an example of #2:
Joe, you said: “But the real proof of what he is all about is in his following: look where he took this--right into the New Age/ 'metaphysical' circuit--same crowd that Sutphen mines for his living.”

I’ve read many of your posts, and in my perception, you typically use “New Age” or “metaphysics” as put-downs. What are you suggesting about the “New Age/metaphysical” crowd that couldn’t be just as easily applied to the “established religion” crowd? Both conventional religion and metaphysics are all about concepts that are (for now) outside of “normal” reality—such as reincarnation, virgin births, energy meridians, resurrection, intuition, turning water into wine, voices speaking from burning bushes, and so on.

So here’s your statement, slightly revised: “But the real proof of what he is all about is in his following: look where he took this--right into the [name any conventional established religion] circuit--same crowd that [name any televangelist or religious leader who has gotten rich off religion] mines for his living.”

Here’s an example of #3:
Joe, you said: “Reincarnation seems to explain some things if you believe in a cyclical universe, but it does not mean that a specific identity or personality reincarnates like a cosmic clone. Personally, I find the lstter concept childish and creepy any more (I too once believed).”

Actually Joe, I am with you on this one. Reincarnation really “does not mean that a specific identity or personality reincarnates like a cosmic clone.” As I understand it, the soul reincarnates into different bodies in different times and places, and in each lifetime, the soul takes on a DIFFERENT identity and experiences DIFFERENT aspects of what we call personality. So if I ran into my great-grandmother, reincarnated into a person living today, she would most likely NOT have the same “specific identity or personality” that she did before. Having been born to different parents (with different genetics) in a different time and place from her last incarnation (and she might even be male this time around), she would have a different identity. Her new environment would also serve to bring out aspects of personality that she may not have explored before.

As far as channeling, not all of us New Agers [your term, not mine] accept it all hook, line, and sinker. I think a lot of people “channel” their own subconscious mind. But if so, that does not serve to disprove reincarnation.

Good night, all!

Hi Onehand,

You said "I don't understand your perception of me as "judge and jury" as I haven't accused anyone of anything."

I would like to explain: I am not surprised that you do not understand my perception of your statements. (Please notice that I do not know you well enough to have a perception of you). It was your statements I was referring to.

A judge and jury never take the accusatory role, that is a prosecutor. I did not compare your statement to that. However, a judge and jury do make judgments which are in most cases considered final and in the case of the jury; one would like to think that they have been judged by a group of their peers.

Referring to your statement directly, you said:
"If you (VR) truly (you have defined what "truly is" one of the major issues on this site) want to know the answer to your question, you can consult the same research and sources Dr. Weiss did. The question is, will you?" (Why is that the question? and how do you not see how that might be interpreted as being condescending and challenging?)

Perhaps you did not "suggest" as I put it, perhaps it was meant as a condescending challenge?

I would like to think that you had meant it as a suggestion and well intentioned.

You referred to Dr. Weiss in your posts as the researcher who used other researchers as his sources.

You did not suggest to someone that they "ONLY" follow, my bad, but I thought the way you put it implied that.

Dr. Weiss cited sources to back up his theories and to substantiate the explanations for the strange occurrences. He did not cite any other sources for alternative explanations because (possibly) it does not make for as interesting a story for most and that he would have to deal with the alternative explanations.

The fact that the sources he cites seem to build a foundation for the case he wants to make even though he is an accredited academic. Does not mean that all of those sources agree necessarily with what he is attempting to prove or disprove. Scientists are miss-quoted, misrepresented, all the time to back up others ideas. The case of Dr. Alpert in "What the bleep" is a prime example.

I was attempting to point out that there was another side to the story and was wondering if you had as open a mind as you suggest to others. However, you chose not to comment on that at all. I would still like to hear your views on the discussion I referred you to.

Hi Journey,

All I have time for is a quick response to your statement--
"I was attempting to point out that there was another side to the story and was wondering if you had as open a mind as you suggest to others. However, you chose not to comment on that at all."

As I told J yesterday, I am packing for a trip. I'm flying out early tomorrow morning, so the only reason I "chose not to commment" on the site you suggested is that I don't have time to look into it just now.

FYI...

The Conversations with God Books... was written by a former Mafu Student.... much of the same Ramtha material in it.

Dang.. Jackie

You just popped my delusional bubble….

Dark chuckle..

David

Has anyone here read the bible? Joe, can you shed some light on this topic with some references to the holy book?

Please... this can't be for real!

holy book? there are so many!
As for the Bible and what it says about the devil, do not look to the Torah for a definition. The story of Job and Satan (who G*d allows to tempt Job) or Jacob wrestling with the "angel" need interpretation in cultural context. Look it up in the Catholic Encyclopedia or ask a Rabbi.
Christian theologians are all over the map with this one, but all agree that the Bible is not a science manual and biblical "history" is not what we understand as history today. So, in my view, if you want to believe that Ramtha is "a devil" go ahead, but then you will have to determine and decide just what kind of devil that is and what a devil can do independent of a human being. I have no evidence of the latter. Do not look to the Bible for a standard because you will have to struggle to wrestle one out of it (unless you are a literalist/fundamentalist---the latter view is only 140 years old or so and is not representative of early Christian thought).

I mentioned before, someone as astute as M Scott Peck in People of the Lie decided that evil exists as a "demon" only through a human body.

I prefer to stay with the obvious---channelers are actors, perhaps delusional actors, and I do not need an evil or good entity to explain how and why they do what they do.

As for onehand's problem with me and "my" opinions of what New Age means or is, I merely allow that term and movement to define itself. Over one hundred years ago the Freemasons issued a magazine called "New Age". Ideas in it are consistent with much of what evolved as the newagemovement later, especially as defined by Marilyn Ferguson's "The Aquarian Conspiracy" around 1980? JZ and company of channelers tap this milieu for their ideas. So does Weiss, Sutphen. I am merely referring to a milieu---I know there are variations within it--not all NewAgers are alike! I do not want to give that impression. We can at least agree on that, onehand!

Joe

re what began this thread:
"I find it particularly appaling that they claim that Jesus was just one son of God and that we are all sons and daughters of God!!!"

I am not apalled, but I do find the whole notion ridiculous. Every religion defines itself by its foundation myths and foundation witnesses and scholars. Historians of religion strive to find those foundations and respect them. JZ and her ilk (eg, Penny Torres) violate both Hindu religion (Vedic philosophy) and Christianity, for example, by trying to mix and remix the two for purely selfish reasons. Jim Melton labelled the RSE as a neo-Gnostic school. He's partly right, imo.

Of course, if you are a devotee of a fringe, "new age" religion like RSE, you will see these violations as "inspired" interpretations, but do not expect your opinion to be taken seriously by anyone who is a true student or scholar of Christian or Vedic religion.

Joe

What Christian denomination do you belong to Joe? Or do you onsider yourself Christian?

re anna wants to know what denomination I am or if I am a Christian?
Is anyone on this message board groaning right now?
Roman Catholic --practicing---I attend mass regularly. Why do you ask?


BTW: here's a catholic view on the devil:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04764a.htm
here's a jewish one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_worship

Joe Sz

Hey Joe, I am smilin not groaning! For a couple of reasons I love your " way out of the closet, flag wavin, I'm a Roman Catholic and not afraid to be open and say it". I was raised Lutheran as a kid and never had a Catholic connection ( except one ex ), so not alot of buttons to push, however you have served to show me future, way future, possibilities that I may once again have a faith and belief system in some sort of sacred community, a spiritual expression with others some day. I'm in no hurry. Since the RSE exit and wakeup call, I've been in subtraction mode very curiously examining what do I believe in, where and why re: naive, vulnerable, gullible blindspots, - big garage sale - everything getting washed, tossed, and 'till critical thinking is definitely 100% back on track I am not shopping for anything new. So I enjoy you enjoying yours.

Also your posts serve as a reportcard of my progress . I may be gaing a little maturity by gosh, I not only don't throw the baby out with the bath water when I see "Joe Z", I say" Hurrah it's Joe Z-lets see what he has to say on this." WOW-I am able to not be on the same page re religion, but ready, willin, open, able and very appreciative of what you have to say. This goes for several {most actually} others who post here regularly too. I'm so happy to easily distinguish now between the personal wisdom gained from experience posts vs. the defensive regurgitated truths? of others, ,arrogant, judgemental gobbilygoop posts.

See how wonderfully your Catholicism actually works for me!

So as a Catholic do you believe that Jesus is the only Christ? Do you believe that we are saved by Jesus?

I am just trying to understand your point of view.

That's Anne, not "anna", I meant above.
Kathleen, thanks for your words.

Ex-members of restrictive, deceptive cults suffer from many things. Embarrassment, confusion, financial distress, loss of time and social connections, and intellectual restriction about almost everything.
I do not mind when my clients or cult members challenge me about the Catholic church. My response is a learning tool, but I could just as well use any major religion to help a person stretch awareness and how to go about it.
For example, whenever I was hired to exit counsel someone from a Hindu-Indian based sect (Sai Baba, Hare Krishna, Sri Chnimoy, for example) my colleagues and I introduce a dialogue about the basis of the religion. Is the new group improving or violating it? Are there better ways to achieve the same goals within the tradition? Is there an elegant application or social context in that "old" religion that the member of the new religion is missing?

These thought processes, even at the basic level of an exit counseling, can cause a severe headache and emotional fatigue in the newly exiting member, and we often have to take breaks. Until someone begins this process, it is hard to see for themselves how restricted and conditioned he or she was in and by the cult.

Re Catholics, when someone attacks me for being one, I usually hear stuff like "What about the Inquisition or what about priest abuse?" The stretching begins when I ask, "What about the Inquisition (I am not condoning it)? Tell me what you know that happened and where. Can you tell me what an Inquisitor was and how they were trained? What were their guidelines? How many people were actually put to death by the Inquisition? Most folks are quite surprised to hear that non-Christian and Christian scholars put the number around 50-90,000 and not the "5 million" of the historically crippled "Da Vinci Code" novel or the "9 million" I often heard from "new agers."

As for the Vedic religions, Hare Krishna members were always surprised that the earliest sages (rishis) that inspired the Rig Veda ate beef, and that reincarnation (metempsychosis) was actually a late development in the philosophy, not an original belief or doctrine.

As a newly reintegrated Christian or Catholic after 19 years seeking outside the Church, I had to stretch my own understanding and seek out the elegant form within the tradition. I met many good tutors--a former Carmelite nun and her ex-priest husband, and a Dominican monk who is a philosophy professor at a college.

Even atheism is a 'religion' that has an elegant expression, but not all atheists express it elegantly.

One problem with cults like RSE is that they lack elegance to the core---when the leader becomes the group essence. I learned that by following Elizabeth Prophet for 2 years. Her personal corruption of intellect and behavior came out in the channeling (dictations). The "masters" were merely her alter ego pretending to be gods and not very good ones.
I was fooled too.

Joe Sz

Thanks for having the courage to share your truth.
Can you understand that there may be others on this forum that have a truth that is different from yours? Is that alright with you or do you feel you need to convert them to your world view?

As far as I understand it, this sight is about healing and support and not about any one person having the absolute truth or "correct" perception of RSE or reality for that matter. Why not allow the posters the freedom of expression so they can make their own way to their own "enlightenmefree" state whatever that might mean for them?

Thanks for posting all your insights Joe. Obviously others on this site get value out of what you write also.

I do not see any need to convert anyone in any of your posts. You are simply atating your own viewpoint based upon a huge amount of experience.

Hello Christel,

Are you also Christian or Catholic. Just getting to know my fellow EMF posters.

i do not dought that people can channel spirits for i have seen strange things throughout my life
as a child growing up,
but who is the creator of religion,it sure is not god,
god,the univers or even an energy source more powerful
then we are, but as human beings we lable the univers as to what ever name we so desire wethere you call it god
or father.
through the years i have done massive research
and found out that the bible if we chose to believe it is the word of god then so be it.
but god did not wright the bible,...man did through
a spirit diuty and that spirit diuty lives in each and everyone of us.
if you read the first five books of the bible,
nowhere dos it state that word christians or cathlics
are the divine people rather it states that we shuld worship the father of creation hence the word
worship dos not mean any thing but to ( LOVE )
and thats all it means most every prophet through time
has had dreams of all future events that today,
all ministers and preachers think they have the anwers
and nether one of them can give a srait to the point answer.
as i have done my research through the years the atlantians were amung the first race of people.
then when atlantis sank into the oceans of the atlantic they moved to which is now known as egypt
acording the the egyption scribes they at one time worshiped the god of the isrealites and they call,d him thoth the father of speach and divine wisdom
the egyptain started studeing what at the time was
known as the secret emberald tablet that the univers itself formed at the point of greed the egyption prests wanted to use the teachings for them selves
and thoth escapped the land of egypt to what we call mount moab or sini which a couple of thousand years later moses was sent to the deserts of sini
and at that time the he also went into sini
to not just find god but to be givin divine
and wisdom of knowlleage.

if there is any dought in the teachings dont blaim the prophets of old bliam the cathlic church for
misinterpatation of its princables

further more the people who are the true children
are the gnostics which rome put to death before christianity

here is the true teaching of the real bible in jerusalum

not only that but the,
Hermetics consider the Divine to be both immanent and transcendent. The Divine is within all things in the manifested Universe (notably including ourselves), and beyond them as well. Because of the interconnection between 'above' and 'below,' what happens on a spiritual level has consequences in the material. Conversely, what happens in the material can have consequences in the spiritual.

Creating equilibrium between all these things --- matter and spirit, body and soul, within and without, night and day, in fact, all polarities --- is pivotal to the spiritual Work of the Hermetic. Balance is the key to growth.
not only that but i figured out why we cant find the reson for being,
it was by the first religion not thoth or hermetic times but by hidding its secrets from the world that no one would ever descover why we are hear,
and hear is the key to divine wisdom.

To the modern Hermetic, Nature is the Divine teacher, the Revealer of the Mysteries. "Art is the Priestess of Nature." Thus, in order to accomplish his or her spiritual Art, the Hermetic must also serve Nature as a Priest or Priestess. The physical world is the manifestation or vessel of Divine Power and Love,(the human body) and we are uniquely entrusted with caring for that vessel.(the human body)
In return for our honor and our care, Nature reveals Her Divine Self as an infinitely profound symbol for the spiritual journey. In the rhythms of the Earth and the cycles of the Sun, the Moon, and the Planets, the awesome structure of the Universe, the complementary miracles of birth and death, the Hermetic finds the Divine unveiled as energy,vibration,light,and frequencie,in the likeness of the true univers.

Human beings have a unique place in the Divine pattern because of our Will. We have the ability to rise to the Divine, and this we must do in order to attain to the Divine. A seeker must want to find. A philosopher must desire to know. And understand furthermore, she or he must use the power of Will to accomplish this. Hermeticism takes an optimistic view of the individual human being as well. Encouraged by Divine Love and through the use of the considerable human power Will, everyone has the ability to achieve union with her or his Higher Self, and eventually to reunite with the Divine.

The idea that humankind has fallen away from a previous state in which we were more blessed and more unified with the Divine ( god or univers) is common to many religions and philosophies. Versions of the concept are to be found in the Egyptian, Greek, Gnostic, and Hebrew mythologies that are components of the Hermetic Current. Hermetics do not see the fall from unity as evil or as a punishment. Instead, it was necessary for spiritual growth. Just as a young person must leave home and truly experience life in order to grow and mature, so humanity as a whole had to 'fall' into experience. But our journey is not complete until we eventually return home and unite with the Divine once more for healing and regeneration.

heres what hermis sayed,

Make yourself grow to immeasurable immensity, outleap all body, outstrip all time, become eternity, and you will understand God. Having conceived that nothing is impossible to you, consider yourself immortal and able to understand everything, all art, all learning, the temper of every living thing. Go higher than every height and lower than every depth. Collect in yourself the sensations of all that has been made, of fire and water, dry and wet; be everything at once, on land, in the sea, in heaven; be not yet born, be in the womb, be young, old, dead, beyond death. And when you have understood all these things at once --- times, places, things, qualities, quantities --- then you can understand God.
basicly by aplying every princable by these terms you shuld be able to relise that we as human being`s are more then human we are told that we have the same power as the divine creator
who made mankind,and the best part about having to find what was hidden from us,we dont even half to look far for them.

hears my consept,

The most difficult thing for people to do
is hear there own SOUL.

Go with the soul.

Notice that so few do.

Notice that so few do.

Frustration and anxiety comes from not
listening to one`s soul.
Lern what is the soul`s desire
- and go with that.

What the soul is after is...

The highest feeling of love you can imagine.

This is the soul`s desire. This is its` purpose.

you judge yourself for wanting to laugh,
wanting to cry,
wanting to win,
wanting to lose
for wanting to experience joy and love
--especilly do you judge yourself for that.

somewhere you,ve come across the idea
that to deny yourself joy,
is Godly.

Denial,
you,ve told yourself, is goodness.

All your life

you have ben convinceing yourselfs
that you are bad.

not only that you are bad.
but the things you want are bad.

sex is bad.money is bad.joy is bad.
power is bad,....and having a lot is BAD.

A Lot Of Anything......


You`ve even created religions
that tell you that you are born in sin.
that you are sinners at birth
in order to convince yourself of your
own evil.

Yet if i told you that you are born of
God.
that you are pure gods and Goddesses
at birth,...PURE LOVE

DO you grasp its implication?

tell you this,

i am peforming a merical right now.
for not only am i speaking to you,
but to every person whos listening to these words.

to each of them, i am now speaking.
i know who everyone of them is.

i know now who will find there way to
these words.

And i know that...
just with my other communications,

some will be able to hear,
some will be able to only listen
some will do nothing.

my promise to you is
to always give you what you ask.

your promise,..........is to ask


heres where you get hung-up

you can accept his son,
offspring, likeness,
but you recoil it being called..his equal.

it is too much to accept.
too much bigness too much wonderment,
too much responsibility.

for if you are gods equal,
that means nothing is being done to you,
and all things are created by you.

there can be no more victims,
no more vilians-- only outcomes of your
thoughts.

you are a three fold being.



Body.Mind.Spirit.
Energy. Matter. Anti-Matter.
Mind. Heart. Soul.
Past. Present. Furure.
The Physical. The Non-Physical.
The metaphysical.
Conscious. Subconscious. Super Consious.
The id. Ego. Super Ego.
Here There. Space Between.

Her Creation His Likeness His Equal.
This Is The Holy Trinity
And It Has Ben Call,d By Many Names.

That Which You Are,
i...am
ps,....i am equal to god

thank you Joe and Kathleen.
The only thing I know right now are the trees and the squirrels.
I cannot even grasp a concept of what is God in any religious concept at this time.
Nor hell, nor reincarnation. Nor "the devil".
Way too big for me right now.
But the posts are very informational.
I really appreciate them.

Stay with the trees and the squirrels, Tree, they will bring you back to yourself - what did it for me is that I feed a colony of 30 feral cats almost everyday and work and caring for them was what brought me back to my sanity and being in the ocean and watching the sunset and enjoying all of nature. You are on the right track - just stay with the love in your being and you will ok.

steven.
I am well enough versed in Hermetic lore and the Gnostic traditions, yet I had trouble following your post. I can imagine how some others felt trying to make sense of what you wrote. Perhaps, as this came up before, English is not your first language, but there is still too much information and rambling---in a word, for most ex-members or anyone not very familiar with you, your post can be "crazymaking."

I suggest, and I mean this kindly, you be more specific and brief. I understand that these are your beliefs, and we can all respect that, but you also come across as didactic or the one who nows the truth about 'Hermetics and Gnostics'. If that is the case, please tell us which Gnostic group by name you believe is the real one---there were dozens. And do you think that they existed as Pre-Christian era groups? In your mind, were they derivative of Egyptian myth and philosophy, Greek, or something other? And if so, can you name the source or seer who first established the Gnostic tradition, in your view?

fyi, Hermes Trismegistis by most scholars is seen as a syncretion of the Greek god Hermes and the Egyptian god Toth---not a real person in history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermes_Trismegistus

Just a few questions to help clarify what you mean.

Joe

Hi Jackie, I couldn't find any information on Neale Donald Walsch being a Mafu student? Where did you hear this? Thanks.

sorry the spelling is correct but i dont use commas
becouse if you are of hermetic teaching then you would understand that in thoughs days they dint need qotations or commas and if english is the first laugage
then hebrew most be the last
religion was created by man not god go read the real bible not a reprint