[milk and honey]

Originally Posted by ENdJOY

pray tell, how do you define spiritual aspects, when the language is so infused with programing... you must invent new words, to convey new concepts.

There's nothing wrong with inventing new words for new concepts but there is certainly something wrong with pretending it is a new concept (when it's not) just by the act of renaming it with a clinical new term. What's more, to then proceed to highlight only the exoteric misrepresentations of the old terms (ie, soul, spirit, ascension, atma, God, etc) in order to more easily dismiss them is questionable to say the least.

Many of us have come to an understanding of esoteric meanings in the older religious texts and for those who haven't, the adepts have continued ever since to refine their terms in some of the modern texts.

Beginning around the mid 19th century some excellent metaphysical works have been released by the spiritual adepts which have clarified their concepts and revealed the thread of truth flowing through them all.

Originally Posted by ENdJOY

Through-out our history there has been snips and pieces of the "Language of Light" found and cherished ... the kabbalists, masters of grammtia and numerology often use four or more words to describe the same thing, depending on the level of consciousness they are trying to reveal...or reach...iit just makes for a jumble of confusion...

Only if the terms are misunderstood. James is hindering our understanding of the continuity of truth by misrepresenting, then dismissing, the older terms as mere products of the 'Human Mind system'. But he's mistaken about that. Those concepts were produced by the adepts to reflect the truth of 'being' and 'anti-being' in order to facilitate our Self-knowledge and ascension into higher levels of being. Believe it or not many people have already achieved that through the self-realisation of spiritual Selfhood.

Originally Posted by ENdJOY

The language of the WM's materials are "embedded" with information that reveals itself as the reader penetrates the levels of consciousness...and quits comparing it with other writings.

All language is "embedded" with deeper information which can be revealed to an intuitive heart.

The only question really is: From what level of consciousness does the language originate?

That question cannot be resolved on the surface because the material may use some pure concepts yet be using them to deliver others in a self serving agenda.

I have compared the WMM with other channelled material and just one of the things i've found in various places is the concept of "embedding". As i said i have no objection to that, i've found it in many places over the years. WMM readers should realise that James' source (?) did not invent a brand new addition to language in their assertion that the material is "embedded". The ancient scriptures are likewise "embedded" and reveal their esoteric meaning to intuitive readers.

As paul said: "The word is discerned by the (inner) spiritual man not by the (outer) carnal man (the outer-mental faculty).

The adepts have 'embedded' similar coding into subsequent additions to the older texts and in many of those more modern works they pointedly mention that they have. So "embedding" is not a new concept by any stretch and James has likely read about it in his obvious research of other scriptural and metaphysical texts.

Originally Posted by ENdJOY

When I first started reading the materials, I would find myself saying, "oh yeah, I know what they are talking about here, they are just using different word for terms I already know"... but I found that they were using different words, because the associations I made with those words were incorrect...

It's not difficult to make incorrect associations for certain words in the WMM because the mistakes are already there by virtue of James' own misrepresentations of those words. If he would present them as originally intended (and clarified frequently since) then the origin of the same concepts he uses in the WMM would be completely obvious. But he doesn't want us to know they're the same. He'd rather dismiss his own misrepresentations of older terms (his straw men) than explain their real meaning and original intent. The question, as i asked elsewhere is "why".

Further thoughts on that are here @ post #65 near bottom of page :http://www.projectavalon.net/forum/s...?t=7928&page=3

Originally Posted by ENdJOY

... there needs to be a common language that encompass all the different word association that each of these fragmented teachings present...and what the members share in our "mundane" language, bridges the gaps for each other.

A common language should integrate the truth concepts of the past rather than misrepresenting them and dismissing them as mere products of the "HMS".

Originally Posted by ENdJOY

take for example, the word "spirit"... and walk that through each of these doors and see how it changes ... and the universal meaning is lost. With the assistance of a Glossary, as a foundation, the WM's language is building a skyscraper that will accommodate everyone comfortably...no matter which door they enter by... there will be no misunderstandings if there is a language that is unique to this world... heretofore unknown.

Problem is the WMM is trying to wipe the true meaning of those terms. It seeks to rewrite the lexicon in order to demolish faith in the accuracy of other sources in relation to itself in the hope of gaining a monopoly on our attention.

The WMM is not a universal anything. It is just another addition to the lexicon that, like everything else, prefers it's own terminology. It prefers it's own to the extent that it will misrepresent others.