Go Back   Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) > Project Avalon Forum > Project Avalon > Project Avalon General Discussion

Notices

Project Avalon General Discussion Finding safe places, information and resources for building communities, site suggestions.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-11-2010, 06:48 PM   #1
shiva777
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 40
Default New agey paradox's and distortions

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/hu...huntley_13.htm

New age Paradoxes and confusions


by Noel Huntley, Ph.D.




Note that we are not wasting time discussing these subjects on the basis of
ancient and hackneyed philosophical arguments regarding free will, life, soul,
etc. but from the New-Age point of view and requiring a high degree of
familiarity with New-Age material. Thus the queries and answers given here will
not make any sense if this familiarity is not present.

1. The Lower-Self/Higher-Self Duality
2. Who was Jesus and was He Crucified?
3. New-Age Statement: Everything Is As It Should Be (?)
4. Is There Really any Free Will?
5. It's Going to Happen but you Have to Try
6. A Problem with Reincarnation
7. We Create Our Reality--There are No Accidents
8. Serving God, Or Serving Self?
9. There is Basically no Evil
10. All is Synchronicity?
11. The Paradox of Negativity




THE LOWER-SELF/HIGHER-SELF DUALITY
The subject is the lower-self/higher-self duality (and the higher-awareness
viewpoint). Since we as the lower-self are, and are not, simultaneously the
higher-self then we cannot apply Earth logic (which is only 3D logic).

The paradox is that the lower-self is 'told' that he or she is agreeing to (and
creating) the problem ('negative' experience). But this lower-self knows that he
or she is not agreeing. Proof is simply to ask the lower-self.

Let us emphasize the importance of this paradox by deliberately, though
reluctantly, presenting horrendous experiences (not for the squeamish). The
lower-self is just about to be burned at the stake, or be tortured with molten
lead poured in the mouth, or eyes cut out! (The paradox element is not changed
by karma information or self-punishment explanations, etc.)

The lower-self is about to suffer unimaginable agony, and a voice whispers from
somewhere, "By the way, you realize you agreed to this, of course!" (With the
implied understanding that it will resolve such and such a spiritual blockage,
that is, that it is necessary under the circumstances, and that it is up to the
individual.)

There is no way that the lower-self is going to agree to this extreme and insane
suffering for this apparent gain of the higher-self and everyone else. Yet we as
the higher-self fall into the same 'delusion'. An excellent analogy being that
of a wise adult (compare higher-self) watching over a young child (compare
lower-self), which let us say, is crying bitterly over some hurt, and the adult
possibly even smiling at the triviality of the problem but having no idea what
the child feels like, and the adult being quite happy to set a program for the
next life involving such experiences - with the intention of creating a positive
outcome (which is not the point we are interested in).

A strong contender for an answer might be that we agreed in an unawareness,
emotionally disturbed, or unconscious state, and that agreement is acting now,
and must be 'found' and changed. However, we know we are not agreeing now and an
unconscious agreement is not an agreement of the conscious lower-self
personality. This is the point. We (as the lower-self) are not agreeing but we
do all the suffering. This simple point is ignored throughout the New-Age
movement.

If one states that this is the way it is, that the energy comes out in such a
manner that this is the 'isness' of it and there is nothing that can be done,
this is possibly acceptable. But not to be told, 'You are agreeing to it' - with
the implication nothing can be done (since 'you' are the cause . . . a kind of
way out, an excuse . . . avoiding really confronting the issue and giving a
proper understanding).

Consequently, and to put it harshly, a particular viewpoint would be that the
lower-self is being set up (certainly the lower-self caused it all but it still
doesn't justify the horrendous suffering). The lower-self life didn't even exist
when the higher-self decided that this future lower-self would or at least may
'have' to suffer in this way. The fact that a lower-self of the higher-self
caused these problems is not relevant to this question, nor that there are other
possible ways of discharging the karma.

An extensive study of channeling does indicate an unexpected inability of the
higher viewpoint to understand and imagine the experience of the lower
viewpoint. Human problems are thus not given much attention at the soul level
until this higher-self is being (projects) the lower-self, whence the full
realization of what really is to be experienced is registered at the lower self.

One might add that as long as there is evil there must be victims (two poles),
and therefore suffering. But this is just advanced physics and the higher levels
ought to be able to find another method of solving problems. (Of course, if one
cognizes on the causes, the problem is cancelled, but this is not easy and may
be long after much suffering.)

One could refer to the extreme duality (separateness) which has now formed
between lower-self and higher-self, and the lower-self is not perceiving the
guidance or ignoring it and thus has to learn by extreme misadventure. But again
the point is that the lower-self is clearly not agreeing and has 'set itself
up', though unknowingly due to this non-recognition of the lower-self experience
from the higher-self. Thus it is useless information stating that we (as the
lower self) are agreeing, even though are involved with the causes unknowingly.

Barring no other solution we lower-selves collectively should select (from the
countless probabilities at the higher level) another solution while at this
level. The process is both 'top down' and 'bottom up' simultaneously (a
confusion in current science). The lower-selves probably have tremendous power
to select probabilities from the higher levels - a product of design and the
impersonal Absolute? (beyond the personalizations).





WHO WAS JESUS AND WAS HE CRUCIFIED?
Most channellings assume Jesus was crucified, e.g., so-called Ascended Master
Hilarion has referred to some karma being alleviated by Jesus's death in this
manner. The Urantia book agrees with this and many other sources (though we may
find these are dubious, biased sources). However, a few disagree. Seth stated
that Jesus was not crucified, but that a deluded, drugged person, who believed
he was Jesus, was crucified (and three persons were involved in the Christ
image). The books by Barbara Marciniak channeled from a Pleiadian group of
collective beings assert that the Dark forces have advanced holography and
sometimes put holographic inserts into our time track. They state that the
crucifixion was such an insert - a very complex one involving a great deal of
energy. They stated that Jesus was well accepted.

The most convincing information comes from Anna Hayes' book, Voyagers II. It
agrees with the Seth material. Past information from three persons were merged
to form the Jesus story. The first one was a 12-strand DNA avatar (12-D) who
came to restore the Sphere of Amenti, a spiritual gateway (Bible: the pearly
gates of Heaven), and restore the integrity of the Hebrew genetic lineage
(hence, 'the savior of the Jews'). The second person was a 9-D avatar, also a
spiritual leader, but this one was in trouble with the Romans. The Elohim, to
distract the Romans, acquired a volunteer soul to make a sacrifice. The
lower-self, named Arihabi, was programmed to think he was Jesus and this one was
crucified. The resurrection (of the 9-D avatar) was played out using holographic
technology but Arihabi, because of his sacrifice, was resurrected and lived for
another 30 years. The 12-D avatar completed a successful mission and left the
planet via a portal through the Arc of the Covenant (and Sphere of Amenti) in
the Great Pyramid; he did not die.

Now we are left with the question, Who, or what is the Jesus image? Does it
simply mean that Jesus is the product of the three personages of the "three
Christs" story? Not necessarily.

This is the author's version of what the "Jesus" image is. The fallen ETs
perceiving the true events of the "three Christs" scenario, decided to exploit
these circumstances to add to their control agenda for the human population.
They gradually, subliminally and by any means of infiltrating knowledge into
society, programmed the population with the story that a spiritually advanced
being called Jesus was crucified, who basically allowed this to happen to save
man from his sins. Thus there was an emphasis on the idea that man had sinned
and must be guilty - and must continue to feel guilty. Note that "guilt" is one
of the most destructive emotions. In effect then the fallen ETs had created an
idea which was agreed upon by the masses who by perpetual thought and prayer, in
accordance with this scenario, created a thought form. A powerful mental
construct - an energy expressing all the implications of this false story:
guilt, sadness, sin, but praise and worship to this imaginary figure Jesus,
including all the great qualities associated with Jesus.

Further to this, degraded spiritual entities - consciousness fragments,
subpersonalities, beings who no longer have a suitably structured vehicle (body)
- would merge with this thought form, strengthening it, and forming a still more
powerful collective thought form. Such a thought form has a life of its own
governed by its programming: the ideas, thoughts, information, which have been
put into it. These entities are attracted to the basic thought form (which the
fallen ETs started) since they would experience all the praise and validation,
sympathy, etc. from the religious population. This is a huge boost to their egos
and, in particular, gives them a continuous supply of energy - the big problem
with a decaying species (caused by negative actions).

The above explanations no doubt will be disturbing to devout Christians. But in
fact, rationally, the explanation ought to be welcomed. Surely it would be great
news to find that no spiritual being was crucified after all. In addition, it
explains why some religious people become obsessed through some kind of
realization as they tune into this powerful thought-form.

Top




NEW-AGE STATEMENT: EVERYTHING IS AS IT SHOULD BE (?)
Anyone well-read in the New-Age field may soon pick up and attune to this
statement - in particular that everything is all right. But is it acceptable in
its present form? Is everything really as it should be? There are countless
pieces of information one could reference to contend this but all that is
required is to remind one of the immense degree of suffering which occurs on
this planet. How can New-Agers really believe that everything is as it should
be; all is perfect; all is in Divine right, etc.?

The failing here is the lack of context. Channeling sources, and humans, are
notorious for ignoring contexts - that is, not defining the context for us. This
might be excused on the basis that at the higher viewpoint one could switch
contexts without telling anyone and at that level it wouldn't be a problem
because of telepathy.

Thus the statement that everything is all right must be taken in the context
that it is a necessary expression at the time since no other probability has
been chosen. The existing one is logical and fully based on the precise
circumstances regarding information and energies. It is a correct 'computer
evaluation'. We could be considered to be in an information system.

The solution to the paradox that everything is all right when it clearly isn't,
is that the term all right is a variable. There is a scale of all right. There
is a path from A to B giving the optimum all right but also many curved paths,
even ones starting in the opposite directions. They all lead to B but we should
aim at the direct route (in particular, for minimum suffering).

Thus the statement 'Everything is as it should be' doesn't and shouldn't mean
one does not endeavor to produce changes for the better. If such a statement is
being introduced without context then it has a negative source - to make people
believe everything is fine and it is not necessary to do anything.





IS THERE REALLY ANY FREE WILL?
Again let us stress we are not interested in the orthodox philosophical
arguments since we are examining the standpoint of the potential validity of
free will.

We can certainly accept the idea that the higher-self has free will, but what
about the lower-self - the human extension? Firstly, karma or the negative
forces may stop one, but this is nothing to do with free will. If, however, the
higher-self has a program for the lower-self which is preventing the lower-self
from utilizing free will, since the lower-self is the higher-self basically then
the lower-self has no free will under these circumstances as far as the program
goes.

We learn to understand that admittedly these higher-self programs are normally
ideal and for the greatest benefit. Thus in this case the lower-self will not be
allowed to have free will where an action is in opposition to the higher-self's
goals. However, we do know that lower-selves commit crimes, etc. These are never
higher-self programs. Thus the lower-self is free to carry out an action if 1)
there is no higher-self conflicting goal, or 2) the goal is based on simple
steps, such as going from A to B: steps which can be manipulated linearly and
physically (or thought-wise), executed deliberately by the lower- self even if
against the higher-self. A simple analogy here is to consider taking the dog for
a walk, using a fairly long lead. You determine the path to take ('you'
corresponding to the higher-self) but the dog (corresponding to the lower-self)
has free will according to how long the lead is; the dog can even get into
mischief. In this analogy (1) above would mean the human is 'steering' the dog
for this period or event but this is where the dog wishes to go anyway. Thus
there is a nonlinear synchronous condition here. There is total free will for
each and both. In 2) the dog moves into an area within the lead length that the
human does not approve of but does nothing - or maybe give a few tugs of
discouragement with the lead.

Thus the lower-self can have free will in this manner. After carrying out
misdeeds on a regular basis the addition of negative forces may arise enabling
the lower-self to have more apparent luck as well as the ability to go from A to
B. The lower-self is now losing guidance from the higher-self. Negativity is
working with the person and influencing the 'dog's lead' - reducing the
effective guidance.

How can this fit in with paradox 3 that everything is all right? 'Everything is
all right' means that the final outcome will always be positive no matter how
much one goes astray. In fact the process of going astray has the potential and
maybe purpose to erase karma. How can one be free to commit a crime and it is
all right?

Basically the higher-self or God/Source is always in control (for the big
picture) but the ego with its crimes can in fact have apparent free will. This
is an apparent violation of the very presence of God but is illustrated by the
dog analogy. There is also a more technical explanation of this of a more
advanced physics nature; a simple analogy in quantum physics in which at the
particle level it is possible to have a violation of the conservation of energy.
There may be a momentary huge fluctuation in energy which seemingly came from
nowhere. However, if one takes the bigger picture, that is, a longer time
interval for the measurements then it is compensated for, and energy is found to
be conserved (the 'violation' eventually resolves itself).

Thus the ego can split the (perfect) energies into a duality; one pole is the
mirror-image of the other and can cancel it. But this cancellation may not occur
for a long time. It is nevertheless eventually going to resolve. The constant
dividing of the energies - dualities - will enable the ego to commit errors of
free will (and deteriorate) but this will continue to pull it back as the
opposite pole attempts to seek wholeness and perfection of energy balance and
harmony by canceling the other pole. All we are saying here is that even when
the ego is taking negative routes in life it is constantly being taught by the
dualities to come back into alignment with the higher-self - all its mistakes
are eventually reflected back. The underlying mechanism of free will, however,
is related to the multidimensional nature of consciousness - see article on The
Theory of One.

A final point is that, mathematically and scientifically speaking, one could
take an infinite number of these levels, that is, infinite nonlinear variables
superimposed; each in the context of the next one above, demonstrating the full
internal mechanics (when broken down like this) of consciousness and free will.





IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN BUT YOU HAVE TO TRY
This is an example whereby the higher-self has determined something to be
accomplished by the lower-self but the lower-self has to go through the motions
of achieving it.

The energies of the higher-self and the lower-self are not on a one to one
basis. What this means is that it can give rise to a higher-self control
simultaneously with an ego control. What is the paradox here? Generally the
higher-self will not fix on a single event or cause. It spans space and time;
whole quantum states of information come into the 3rd dimension. This is a bit
like passing through a town (higher-self control) but have free will not to go
straight through down the main road. Two essential programs will exist in this
quantum state, 1) a goal (with many probabilities), 2) a guidance program for
the best route, say, from A to B. Thus there is an overall goal program to
succeed but there are many paths to get there. These paths can be divided still
further by taking negative paths (e.g., committing crimes) by splitting the
energies creating dualities - see other articles.

What it means then is that the lower-self continues to persevere and ultimately
all efforts will be weighted in favor of the higher purpose, and the lower-self
will eventually be brought back on course no matter how far astray it goes. Thus
there is free will within these large boundaries or higher dimensions.





A PROBLEM WITH REINCARNATION
We all understand what is meant by reincarnation, and in this context it is well
established as a fact; even psychologists have proven that we have past lives
(but this information is not allowed to become established and brought to the
attention of the public).

Almost the entirety of the New-Age field acknowledges the validity of
reincarnation and also Eastern philosophies, contrary to Christianity and
science. There are, however, one or two other sources which could be placed in
the New-Age category which do not agree with reincarnation.

The Urrantia Book - a perfectly written work of 2000 pages by over a hundred
spiritual beings (apparently not channeled but appeared in the form of papers in
1934) - emphatically denies reincarnation as 'stultifying'. If we assume this is
a true statement, can we find any way of reconciling this viewpoint?

The book does give an afterlife description in which graded levels have been
created for man's gradual evolution from the one basic physical life through
over 600 bodies of decreasing density and increasing frequency into higher and
higher spiritual worlds. This could be a satisfactory explanation except that it
does not state that it is an alternative route - it actually appears to deny
reincarnation.

There is also the channeled book The Book of James, from the philosopher William
James. This is definitely in the New-Age category but again denies positively
the validity of past lives. It adds, however, that a person on rare occasions
may return after physical death from an Earth bound condition and take on
another body. But this is unfortunate and not conducive to the evolution of the
individual. We can agree with this since it is not the proper method of
reincarnation in which the being goes to the astral planes or above returning to
the higher-self with great benefit before eventually setting up another
incarnation.

We can of course say that there is really no past lives since everything is
simultaneous. But if these sources meant this they would surely state this.
There is still another possible way out. It would be correct to say that we do
or do not have past lives depending on the context. In the context of the
lower-self personality we do not have more than one life, but in the context of
the higher-self we have many lives of different personalities, though of the
same spiritual being. Again if this was the explanation of the discrepancies
they would surely be stated. We are thus left with a puzzle as to why these
books create this confusion (assuming they are incorrect).

Since writing the above it has become apparent that Urrantia is in fact a realm
of 'advanced' fallen angelics who are 'recruiting' - to put it mildly - humans.
Thus any statement made by them can be regarded as suspect.





WE CREATE OUR REALITY - THERE ARE NO ACCIDENTS
The paradoxes and most of the confusions arise because the human's mind and
spiritual condition is dimensionally fragmented. The individual is composed of
several parts - conscious mind, subconscious, unconscious, higher-self - which
are not always operating in unison. An ET communicating to a human could find it
quite confusing since they can read vibrations and perceive beyond the surface;
they will seemingly observe a multiple personality.

It has been channeled that the Zetas when first contacting Earth "hit a brick
wall" of understanding when discovering that the higher-self of the human had
agreed to the "detention" but the lower-self disagreed with this "abduction".
Note that this does not necessarily mean this detention/abduction was entirely
positive, in particular, on the part of the ETs, but it would mean there was a
lesson to be learned.

In general then the lower-self is simply not aware of what is going on with the
other parts of self - certainly including creating one's reality. Let us
consider three separate states to the total individual, say, conscious mind, a
half-conscious condition or subconsciousness, and the higher-self. The
higher-self view encompasses the views of the other two but the lower-self's
conscious mind is only aware of itself. Nevertheless this lower-self aspect is
capable of formatting energies (which are created by the higher-self). Generally
the higher-self acts on a large scale beyond spacetime, and includes many
probabilities, whereas the lower-self acts in a focused condition and selects
probabilities from the higher-self.

The lower-self may completely fail to perceive that its singular thoughts and
actions are part of a bigger energy network, and that the path will lead to
problems and suffering which the higher-self is forced to create even though it
has provided continuous guidance to do otherwise. We might imagine the
child-and-adult analogy for the lower- and higher-selves. The "child" is playing
in the playroom. The higher-self (adult) determines the bigger or broader
picture (in particular through programs prior to a life), such as playing in the
room or then going outside on the swing. But the "child," say, deviates away
from these programs and begins to swing too high, which is expressing a mind
pattern in this manner (karma), and fails to heed the advice from the "adult"
(to take another path).

The higher-self is compelled to create these conditions since it is the
lower-self's life with agreed upon limitations: "veil of forgetfulness", etc.
The higher-self cannot stop or interfere in the detailed decision of the "child"
to swing higher and higher; it can only provide a general influence, with a
sphere of freedom to enable the child to decide otherwise. The free will must be
respected.

Thus we (as a whole) are knowingly providing the energies for what may be a
negative condition brought about by the formatting process of the lower-self
(which forces the energies to be applied in this way). The lower-self has to
learn to correlate energy (from the higher-self) with its own formatting
(thinking, acting).

Let's take the analogy from a slightly different view and attempt to put the
matter in a nutshell - even though we know there are no successful analogies. We
might imagine the adult with the child on a lead - ahead of the adult. This is
similar to taking the dog for a walk. You control where you go but the dog, or
the child/lower-self, has freedom within the length of the lead. The forward
motion and space is essentially created by the adult but the child can choose
which part of this space to select.

Now what about "there are no accidents". Initially one will merely apply this to
major events and experiences of significance. But it appears there are no half
measures. The first reaction is that it appears nonsensical that there are no
accidents and that everything has a reason, since many "accidents" involve more
than one person. The requirements for one person must match those of another's
requirements. For example, if a person has a car accident then those who even
merely witness this will be part of the event with their own reasons. If there
is an airplane crash then each person has selected that flight to experience the
crash. Some examples are immensely complex in terms of satisfactory
explanations. In effect we are stating that everything is a synchronicity
whether experienced as positive or negative.

The physics would have to be extremely complex involving higher-dimensional
holographic mechanics with infinite possibilities always available (see article
The Theory of One). Only a physics which models wholeness - a simultaneous span
of space and time with countless actions all taken into account at every instant
- can handle this. It is the extent of the interrelationship, the undivided
wholeness which is mind-boggling, that is, it means the undivided wholeness must
come first. For nothing to be an accident it means that every molecule in our
personal environment (each person's universe) is acting to express outwardly the
internal condition of the individual! This is what is being indicated in the new
thinking.





SERVING GOD, OR SERVING SELF?
This one is really not very difficult but there is endless confusion regarding
its interpretation.

The first viewpoint, and in keeping with the 'negative' education on this
planet, is that one functions purely for self, which is recognized to be the
perceivable personality, the conscious/subconscious mind and ego (the lower
self). There is no real recognition of higher-self, or God, or higher purposes.
This is serving the (ego) self. A second viewpoint is the Christian one of
serving God ("Thy will and not my will").

Up to a relatively short while ago these were the main two viewpoints. But we
find that neither are satisfactory. Serving self is totally materialistic, is
Darwinian, of Newtonian physics, a world of out-of-phase energies and
randomness, which we find leads to destruction eventually of the whole. We soon
sense there is something wrong with the simple viewpoint.

The Christian view of serving God also has its weaknesses. It is, however, the
next step above the serving self interpretation. There is a recognition of power
but a power which humans won't take responsibility for, and thus assign it to
external causes. This attributing of power may apply to anything from a ritual,
to psychic healing, to medical science. It is a way of getting the power to
operate by not taking responsibility and believing it comes from elsewhere. This
enables the power to operate - unconsciously.

We create an objective world by denying responsibility and this, amazingly,
enables us to do this without believing in ourselves (our power). Even an
extreme objective event such as a combustion engine will only operate through
basic original agreements (all is fundamentally subjective) but by denying
consciousness has anything to do with it, it becomes extremely objective and
separate, and seemingly independent.

What we are stating is that the power in humans operates indirectly (due to lack
of responsibility) so that one doesn't know it is coming from oneself. Thus the
concept of 'serving God' as an external source is also the result of not taking
responsibility. But it can still work this way up to a point.

The best solution is neither emphasis on ego-self or God (externally), and
recognizing that the energy creating self, which is under continuous creation
from the source (God), is the real-self, or God-self, an aspect of the One in
each human (and each atom, etc.). The ego-self is a structure which builds up in
the 3rd dimension and begins to function its own way according to a very narrow
span of data, and goes out of phase with the higher-self, real-self, or
true-self, which is an aspect of the God energy.

Thus one is only serving self (in the true sense) even when it is God. Some
people write this 'Self' with a capital 'S'. It is not logical or intelligent to
serve someone else. One acts as the greater self because it preserves and
expands the whole and automatically operates for the greatest good. The ego-self
destroys the whole ultimately.





THERE IS BASICALLY NO EVIL?
In making a judgment on this, one must distinguish between those few cases, for
example, religious, which consider it a fact that there is basically no evil,
without understanding the necessity of context, and those people who have the
same belief but recognize "it all depends".

From the physics point of view it is not difficult to resolve any dilemma here.
It is a subject of dualities. The holographic whole has a safety mechanism in
allowing its parts to create evil, commit crimes, be selfish, etc. These actions
split a perfect energy (sine waves in mathematical holistic balance) into two
poles enabling one pole to express evil but the opposite, a mirror image,
inherently can cancel it at some time (giving a period of karma).

Thus these poles are interdependent; one can't exist without the other. Evil
can't exist without an opposite pole, such as "receivers of evil". In order to
erase evil one cannot ever destroy it physically, one must simply stop being a
receiver of evil (for example, a victim).

Everything external - all the evil in the world - is apparently a reflection of
our internal condition.

If one has studied New-Age material a great deal, a confusion might arise
regarding the use of the term mirror-image. It may be used to express both
horizontal dualities (both poles in 3D) and vertical dualities (one pole in 3D,
the other in 4D or higher). The latter example would be mirror-image projections
from the One source, God, of all its forms, that is, the parts, the
fragmentations are mirror-images of the source but only in the sense the
reflection in a mirror is an (reverse) image of self. This "fragment" doesn't
subtract from the higher-self - it is a reflected extension and of lower
frequency. This is the vertical duality - the lower part (the image) doesn't
cancel out the higher source when brought together. With horizontal dualities
one pole will cancel out the other for example, gravity/antigravity. The two are
complementary - they are equivalent. However, in both cases, vertical and
horizontal, a new unity will be formed when brought together.





ALL IS SYNCHRONICITY
At some point in one's acquisition of information one might have arrived at the
conclusion that some events, incidents, are not accidental coincidences - that
they are meaningful coincidences or synchronicities. Further study reveals that
both negative and positive synchronicities occur and they are very frequent.

We have eventually been told in the New-Age field through channeling that there
are no accidents and everything has a reason - in other words all is
synchronous. From a scientific point of view this is initially very unappealing.
How can we justify removing all chance or accident. We might accept that chance
events are regularly interrupted with synchronicities. But for every detailed
significant and insignificant event to be a synchronicity defies all common
sense.

This all depends on one's framework. This civilization has been programmed with
a Newtonian reality, not a quantum physics reality.

Thus if we are to accept the insistence that all is synchronous we have to look
at life and the universe in a completely different light - literally. If all is
vibration of energy, which is basically light, which in turn is also
information, then there is nothing but information.

If information, only (and always), is interacting with information, then there
can only be synchronicities. We have to reverse our viewpoint and realize that
we have taken for granted the notion of chance, and totally turned a blind eye
to its illogical acceptance. Instead of perceiving synchronicity as infrequent
or strange we could consider that any chance event is odd or even impossible.

Everything is already there in the information and thus there are always links
between parts, and parts and the whole, and like frequencies will attract like
frequencies.

Also we must remember that there are many probabilities and possibilities which
can be chosen and we don't have to be victims of a single sequence dictated by
information and synchronicities. However, in our lives we experience many
negative synchronicities along with positive ones - or apparently neutral ones.
By negative we mean not desirable. Nevertheless, even negative synchronicities
occur to push the individual towards positive synchronicities. The duality
mechanism described previously will ensure that ultimately the end result will
be positive - no matter how long it takes - which of course implies an influence
from some other level. Remember this is the third dimension of illusions and
learning. It doesn't have to be this way (the apparent lack of free will) in a
higher, evolved and more multidimensional state.





THE PARADOX OF NEGATIVITY
We are being told that the human race on planet Earth is the ultimate
experiment. One of the main purposes of this experiment is the exploration of
all facets of negativity (to understand it and its possible useful
applications); also to transmute and integrate this energy higher dimensionally.

Diverse schools of thought and bodies of knowledge have given different and
sometimes vague information on the origin and causes of negativity on our
planet. Christianity, in effect, states it is due to the Temptation plus man's
sins. 'Temptation' we can interpret as negative input, and 'sins' simply means
negative actions, or to avoid unnecessary guilt, we can call them mistakes.
Another major source claims that man is entirely responsible (entirely his
negative actions), though much of the New-Age stresses that things have gone too
far and that the suffering, etc. was never intended. However, ascended master
material has validated the notion of an initial input - from the Dark forces.

Part of the paradox is that negativity needed to be researched and preferably
have it run out into all its extremes and possibilities (this has been done now)
but ethically one would never plan suffering. Channel Robert Shapiro channeling
the spiritual entity Zoosh gives us a satisfactory answer (at least as a general
idea).

Briefly, 2% negativity was planned for Earth's human civilization. With this
degree one could not even break one's leg but could stub one's toe, get annoyed
or feel impatient. There is no way this small degree of negativity would have
got out of hand. However, Zoosh tells us that the human race at its inception
needed more feminine energy. This suggestion, even warning (from a 'Divine
feminine emissary') was rejected by the 'council of creators'. Within 100 years
(of billions of years ago) this drastic mistake was recognized.

We conclude that the human race didn't stand a chance - in particular, as a
result of the interference from fallen angelics. Negativity expanded into all
its horrific aspects, extremes and varieties. We are told the experiment is over
and a clean-up is taking place. Research results? - that a small percentage of
negativity will give growth to a civilization. Negativity has now been
integrated within the learning curve.

A follow-up query might be: are we victims of this experiment? Apparently not,
since before our individuation as humans on Earth, we were partially the
creators of this experiment, that is, were a portion of the creator of this
creation. However, one might still conclude that this is paradoxical because of
the subsequent lack of awareness during the experiment. [Is the hypnotized self,
during an agreed upon hypnotic session during which painful, traumatic incidents
are run, a victim of the waking self?] Tags:
shiva777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 07:52 PM   #2
greybeard
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Inverness Scotland
Posts: 924
Default Re: New agey paradox's and distortions

Dont think you will get too many replies to start with, anyway, because of the opening statement.
Pity because you have put a lot of work into a valuable topic.
Regards Chris


Note that we are not wasting time discussing these subjects on the basis of
ancient and hackneyed philosophical arguments regarding free will, life, soul,
etc. but from the New-Age point of view and requiring a high degree of
familiarity with New-Age material. Thus the queries and answers given here will
not make any sense if this familiarity is not present.
greybeard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 08:46 PM   #3
mkspllmn
Avalon Senior Member
 
mkspllmn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 196
Default Re: New agey paradox's and distortions

I think we have the potential for free will but it can not be exercised without a lot of money.

Otherwise we are slaves.

I say lets get rid of the money and then we will all be rich.
mkspllmn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2010, 12:26 AM   #4
Moxie
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beaver Lake, AR
Posts: 402
Default Re: New agey paradox's and distortions

Wow, has it really been that many years that I read the Seth material?
Guess I've burned a few braincells since then (stop laughing Chris) lol because I don't remember the Seth material talking about the 3 Yeshuas... it's like "new" news to me that Ashayana and Seth agree about that. hmmm
Moxie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2010, 02:00 AM   #5
greybeard
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Inverness Scotland
Posts: 924
Default Re: New agey paradox's and distortions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moxie View Post
Wow, has it really been that many years that I read the Seth material?
Guess I've burned a few braincells since then (stop laughing Chris) lol because I don't remember the Seth material talking about the 3 Yeshuas... it's like "new" news to me that Ashayana and Seth agree about that. hmmm
You and me together Moxie are brand new not new age. so there!!!!
ch
greybeard is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Project Avalon