mediumship and Seth discussions

bluebird

Major Contributor
Hi Baob,
Question 1: Mikey tells me they both are experiences / life journeys that are with him . Not past , but with him now. (I cannot wrap my head around this no time thing, fyi! Carol)
Question 2: Mikey tells me they are part of him and his knowledge base. They are not going on now as they are from a time based dimension (here on earth) which he is no longer in. But what was learned and experienced is a part of him , and Mikey is in an afterlife dimension where there is no rules of time.
Question 3: Mikey tells me when we are on earth, we are under the rules and influences of time. So, our lives here are not occurring simultaneously. There is an order here. When we return to the afterlife, the rules no longer apply. It is a timeless dimension. The knowledge gained becomes a part of us according to Mikey. Past and present from this dimension is irrelevant.
Carol and Mikey "in Spirit"

These explanations make a lot of sense to me. While experiencing those lives, Mikey lived them one by one, in a linear fashion, since that is how time works in this life / dimension. Once back in the afterlife, all of those lives are with him, are part of him, and the experiences and knowledge gained in those lives are accessible to him.

It's much like memory. While actually living an experience and creating it in memory, one is centered within that experience -- the experience being had might call to mind other related experiences/memories, but for the most part one is in the currently occurring experience. Later, the next week, or next month, or next year, or ten years later, or at the end of one's life, many/all memories can be accessed more or less equally (or at least those which are important to the individual). They all occurred at different times, and in a linear fashion, but that no longer makes a difference.
 

baob

Active Member
Hi Baob,
Question 1: Mikey tells me they both are experiences / life journeys that are with him . Not past , but with him now. (I cannot wrap my head around this no time thing, fyi! Carol)
Question 2: Mikey tells me they are part of him and his knowledge base. They are not going on now as they are from a time based dimension (here on earth) which he is no longer in. But what was learned and experienced is a part of him , and Mikey is in an afterlife dimension where there is no rules of time.
Question 3: Mikey tells me when we are on earth, we are under the rules and influences of time. So, our lives here are not occurring simultaneously. There is an order here. When we return to the afterlife, the rules no longer apply. It is a timeless dimension. The knowledge gained becomes a part of us according to Mikey. Past and present from this dimension is irrelevant.
Carol and Mikey "in Spirit"
Thank you so much, Carol and Mikey!
The answer to the 1st question is the same as Seth's speaking. And the answers to other questions make so much sense.
 

baob

Active Member
Hi Carol and Mikey,

I have questions after reading Seth’s books. He said he’s acted as a guide to others before and changed his appearance depending on the person’s beliefs. Sometimes when the person passed over, he presented himself as Christ to the Christian or as the person’s loved ones to meet them in the afterlife because the loved one was busy with other things.

1) So I wonder if the loved ones I talked to through the medium were really my loved ones or if it was just my spiritual guide/higher-self pretending to be them?
2) Every medium’s receptive ability is different so how can they tell they were truly talking to my loved ones?

Thanks!
 

mac

janitor
Hi Carol and Mikey,

I have questions after reading Seth’s books. He said he’s acted as a guide to others before and changed his appearance depending on the person’s beliefs. Sometimes when the person passed over, he presented himself as Christ to the Christian or as the person’s loved ones to meet them in the afterlife because the loved one was busy with other things.

1) So I wonder if the loved ones I talked to through the medium were really my loved ones or if it was just my spiritual guide/higher-self pretending to be them?
2) Every medium’s receptive ability is different so how can they tell they were truly talking to my loved ones?

Thanks!
I acknowledge this is Mikey's thread and I will later remove my remarks. But I want to offer my observations concerning mediums and mediumship, something I've always had a special interest in and something I've been more involved with in recent months. Only a few minutes ago I was discussing the situation with a friend who's a medium and who I watched working yesterday evening.

Concerning your first question I have never before heard the notion that a spirit guide would pretend to be the loved one of a recipient. If it were true I would find that idea deceitful and unacceptable. In reality I find it literally unbelievable. That's not what spirit guides do. The higher self notion is equally unbelievable and untenable.

On your second point please consider the following. A medium is a go-between for communication (of whatever kind) between this and the next world. The medium doesn't need to tell if (s)he is in contact with the loved one of the recipient but does need to obtain details for the recipient to tell that. A competent, evidential medium will strive to get the details needed, details that are evidence of the spirit communicator's identity.

Think on, if you would, that a medium's "receptive ability" is not the only factor involved. Every spirit communicator has a personal level of effectiveness in working with a medium. Just as in this world, some individuals communicate more effectively than others, some mediums may receive more readily. Both are involved and both affect the effectiveness of the communication.
 

baob

Active Member
Thanks for your comment, mac!
On the second point what I mean is that because my guide and my higher self know me very well. So they can provide the evidence through the medium. Not sure if the medium can tell where the information comes from.
Regarding the first question, when I read on that point, I felt uneasy and surprised. But Seth explains that he did this in order to help the person transit smoothly.
 

mareke

New Member
Testing Mikey by using information revealed by someone like Seth is subject to distortion and not something I'd do lightly. Seth for instance revealed that Christ was never crucified and that someone who was drugged agreed to take Christ's place to fulfill the bible prophecies in relation to a messiah coming. I wouldn't put Mikey in a position of having to acknowledge or deny something like that because it would be unfair.

I've read many of the Seth books and I don't remember Seth saying he pretended to be a loved one to someone while still on earth. Members of one's soul family including guides can apparently take on different appearances designed to help or teach a soul who has returned to the spirit world. Michael Newton had one person he hypnotized say that on returning to the spirit world he was met by a horned creature resembling the devil. It was done briefly in jest because the returning spirit had spent his last life on earth as a pastor preaching hellfire and damnation to his flock. When the horned creature who resembled the devil morphed back into the guide the soul acknowledged that he'd spent his life on earth misleading people by preaching the way he did. The returning soul didn't think badly of his guide for briefly appearing as the devil. He acknowledged that he deserved it after spending a life preaching things that caused many of his congregation to live in fear of going to hell for the slightest transgressions.

As for mediums I don't know why anyone would see one when there have been so many frauds both past and present. Why are people constantly trying to contact the other side through mediums when they have lives to live here to learn and grow from?

In recent times prominent mediums Warren Caylor, Kai Muegge, David Thompson, Gary Mannion have all been frauds. The most successful fraudulent medium was Leslie Flint. Flint never gave evidential readings. The only time any sitter asked him for evidence to prove the spirit (Marilyn Monroe) was who the spirit claimed to be, the 'spirit' disappeared.

Flint did give readings to grieving parents. One example is when David Browning the deceased son of parents who came to Flint came through. The 'reunion' lasted exactly 1 minute and 38 seconds. Flint would have had an opportunity to learn the son's accent by speaking to the parents beforehand. Listening to the supposed voice of the son it sounded like Flint speaking in the same accent as the parents. The son revealed nothing at all to verify it was him. The whole thing lasted a minute and 38 seconds so the parents had no chance of working out it was Flint pretending to be their son. It was a masterful exhibition of rat cunning by a fraud who got away with his fraudulent garbage his entire life.

Flint had a cockiness about him that started to disappear in photos of him taken towards the end of his life when he knew there could be hell to pay for deceiving people the way he did. When you are a fraud you have to have nerves of steel and be on guard all the time to minimise the chances of being exposed. Fint's nerve started to fail him as he aged and he couldn’t go ahead with some séances and gave people their money back. Emily French is an example of a genuine medium who performed séances right into old age because being genuine she was a conduit for spirits coming through. Another example is Lucy Hale who gave séances into extreme old age with various male and female voices coming through. She was able to do that because she was genuine.

In Australia I know of a prominent medium who offers, Visa, MasterCard etc as payment methods. Pay in advance and then wait for the reading after the money comes through and the medium has had time to research you on the internet to see what you've revealed about yourself. It’s beyond me why anyone would pay for such a thing.
 

bluebird

Major Contributor
It's true that there are too many fraudulent mediums, but there may be some legitimate ones as well. The medium I saw is Janet Nohavec, and at the very least I believe that she believes in what she's doing (I don't believe she's a scammer). One of my reasons for that is that is related to one of the points mareke made -- when you make an appointment, Janet (or her appointment-maker) makes it a point to tell you to only give your first name. So they don't have your last name at all, either when you make the appointment or later at the actual reading. This means that there's no way for them to look anyone up ahead of time, to google someone coming for a reading, or look them up online on any other websites, social media, etc.
 

mac

janitor
Thanks for your comment, mac!
On the second point what I mean is that because my guide and my higher self know me very well. So they can provide the evidence through the medium. Not sure if the medium can tell where the information comes from.
Regarding the first question, when I read on that point, I felt uneasy and surprised. But Seth explains that he did this in order to help the person transit smoothly.
Your guide will not become involved in mediumistic communication - that's not a guide's role.

Your so-called higher self is not a discrete entity hence is not a source of information..

The medium doesn't need to know where information originates other than to be sure it's not from you - not from psychic reading of yourself - and to be sure it's from a spirit contact who has a connection to you. A psychic doesn't and that's why I'm forever banging on about the differences between mediums and psychics.

An evidential medium will be contacted by a spirit individual and will use her/his attributes as a medium to ask for information that will provide evidence of the spirit's link to you. That information should be relayed by the medium to you, the intended recipient. Then it's over to you to confirm or reject the information and the communicator's relationship. When you're satisfied the information is from someone in your family or from a friend then you have had a clear indication the individual has survived death and wants to let you know it. That's the basis of evidential mediumship.

I can not comment on the piece you've mentioned by Seth as I have not read it.
 

mac

janitor
As I've remarked in the C&M thread this discussion about mediumship has moved away from its Q&A format and should be carried on here.
 

mac

janitor
Testing Mikey by using information revealed by someone like Seth is subject to distortion and not something I'd do lightly.
Trying to test Mikey is highly disrespectful and I will not allow it.

Seth for instance revealed that Christ was never crucified and that someone who was drugged agreed to take Christ's place to fulfill the bible prophecies in relation to a messiah coming.
As there can be no corroboration for such a claim it must remain that - a claim.

I wouldn't put Mikey in a position of having to acknowledge or deny something like that because it would be unfair.
You would not be allowed to try.

I've read many of the Seth books and I don't remember Seth saying he pretended to be a loved one to someone while still on earth. Members of one's soul family including guides can apparently take on different appearances designed to help or teach a soul who has returned to the spirit world. Michael Newton had one person he hypnotized say that on returning to the spirit world he was met by a horned creature resembling the devil. It was done briefly in jest because the returning spirit had spent his last life on earth as a pastor preaching hellfire and damnation to his flock. When the horned creature who resembled the devil morphed back into the guide the soul acknowledged that he'd spent his life on earth misleading people by preaching the way he did. The returning soul didn't think badly of his guide for briefly appearing as the devil. He acknowledged that he deserved it after spending a life preaching things that caused many of his congregation to live in fear of going to hell for the slightest transgressions.
no comment

As for mediums I don't know why anyone would see one when there have been so many frauds both past and present. Why are people constantly trying to contact the other side through mediums when they have lives to live here to learn and grow from?
If I thought you were interested I would explain why people seek out mediums.
 

baob

Active Member
Testing Mikey by using information revealed by someone like Seth is subject to distortion and not something I'd do lightly. Seth for instance revealed that Christ was never crucified and that someone who was drugged agreed to take Christ's place to fulfill the bible prophecies in relation to a messiah coming. I wouldn't put Mikey in a position of having to acknowledge or deny something like that because it would be unfair.

I've read many of the Seth books and I don't remember Seth saying he pretended to be a loved one to someone while still on earth. Members of one's soul family including guides can apparently take on different appearances designed to help or teach a soul who has returned to the spirit world. Michael Newton had one person he hypnotized say that on returning to the spirit world he was met by a horned creature resembling the devil. It was done briefly in jest because the returning spirit had spent his last life on earth as a pastor preaching hellfire and damnation to his flock. When the horned creature who resembled the devil morphed back into the guide the soul acknowledged that he'd spent his life on earth misleading people by preaching the way he did. The returning soul didn't think badly of his guide for briefly appearing as the devil. He acknowledged that he deserved it after spending a life preaching things that caused many of his congregation to live in fear of going to hell for the slightest transgressions.

As for mediums I don't know why anyone would see one when there have been so many frauds both past and present. Why are people constantly trying to contact the other side through mediums when they have lives to live here to learn and grow from?

In recent times prominent mediums Warren Caylor, Kai Muegge, David Thompson, Gary Mannion have all been frauds. The most successful fraudulent medium was Leslie Flint. Flint never gave evidential readings. The only time any sitter asked him for evidence to prove the spirit (Marilyn Monroe) was who the spirit claimed to be, the 'spirit' disappeared.

Flint did give readings to grieving parents. One example is when David Browning the deceased son of parents who came to Flint came through. The 'reunion' lasted exactly 1 minute and 38 seconds. Flint would have had an opportunity to learn the son's accent by speaking to the parents beforehand. Listening to the supposed voice of the son it sounded like Flint speaking in the same accent as the parents. The son revealed nothing at all to verify it was him. The whole thing lasted a minute and 38 seconds so the parents had no chance of working out it was Flint pretending to be their son. It was a masterful exhibition of rat cunning by a fraud who got away with his fraudulent garbage his entire life.

Flint had a cockiness about him that started to disappear in photos of him taken towards the end of his life when he knew there could be hell to pay for deceiving people the way he did. When you are a fraud you have to have nerves of steel and be on guard all the time to minimise the chances of being exposed. Fint's nerve started to fail him as he aged and he couldn’t go ahead with some séances and gave people their money back. Emily French is an example of a genuine medium who performed séances right into old age because being genuine she was a conduit for spirits coming through. Another example is Lucy Hale who gave séances into extreme old age with various male and female voices coming through. She was able to do that because she was genuine.

In Australia I know of a prominent medium who offers, Visa, MasterCard etc as payment methods. Pay in advance and then wait for the reading after the money comes through and the medium has had time to research you on the internet to see what you've revealed about yourself. It’s beyond me why anyone would pay for such a thing.
I don't know from what part of the questions that I asked Carol and Mikey gives you the impression that I am trying to test Mikey? For what purpose I need to test him? I came to this forum because I lost my loved one. Silver Birch said (not the exact quote) death will open the door for spiritual awakening. Because I read Seth's books, it trigged some questions about the mediumship. I know we never can get the true pictures of afterlife. We only get every bit from every medium and the books that channeled. That is why Carol and Mikey's platform helps us a lot. Why what I asked the questions has to be judged by you?
Regarding you don't remember Seth ever said the things that trigged my questions, I only can tell you you can check back "Seth Speaks" and "Seth Materials" these two books yourself. I don't have the time to look for it to prove anything.
Actually I can just ask the two questions without stating what triggered my questions.
 
Last edited:

mac

janitor
I don't know from what part of the questions that I asked Carol and Mikey gives you the impression that I am trying to test Mikey? For what purpose I need to test him? I came to this forum because I lost my loved one. Silver Birch said (not the exact quote) death will open the door for spiritual awakening.
As a contributor to this thread I have my own thoughts and reactions. The loss of a loved one can be a way through a door we didn't even know was there. Bereavement and grieving may leave us wanting to understand what death is about and what - if anything - follows it. It may also result in our being more open and receptive to the possibility.

Because I read Seth's books, it trigged some questions about the mediumship. I know we never can get the true pictures of afterlife. We only get every bit from every medium and the books that channeled.
I read many books of different types when I began my search for understanding. I rejected pretty quickly what I found in some and others I discarded later as things began to drop into place. I know nothing about Seth's ideas save for what people tell me. Please remember, though, that any information about the afterlife state may be colored by the medium through whom they are directed. What we can't be sure about is which ideas are affected.


That is why Carol and Mikey's platform helps us a lot. Why what I asked the questions has to be judged by you?
This is an open forum where what's said can be challenged in a proper manner by anyone. It's not necessarily being judged but any weaknesses in what's been said may be pointed out. That's what I have done routinely for years. My intention in so doing is to strip away personal ideas and views and also misunderstandings. It's not necessarily appreciated by those on the receiving end! It's been the same for me when I've been found wanting in what I've written!

Regarding you don't remember Seth ever said the things that trigged my questions, I only can tell you you can check back "Seth Speaks" and "Seth Materials" these two books yourself. I don't have the time to look for it to approve anything.
Actually I can just ask the two questions without stating what triggered my questions.
Anyone can say or claim anything but when it's specific and from a named source it's better to quote the piece verbatim, ideally referencing it to the original, the book or whatever. In the particular example here Mareke has no recollection of Seth saying what you, baob, have claimed. Either of you could be right, either of you could be wrong or you may both be! In order to substantiate what's said one member would have to read everything Seth had said - a mammoth task - or the other would have to quote the piece he was referring to, still needing work but a smaller task.

If I were adjudicating I'd say the latter situation is the most readily doable hence more the latter person's responsibility than the former's.
 

mac

janitor
I run the risk of metaphorically sounding like an LP with the needle stuck in one of the grooves but my benchmark of readability are the words communicated by Silver Birch and compiled into books by various authors.

I'm repeating myself yet again but SB was widely regarded as one of the most eloquent communicators. Although that doesn't mean other communicator's words do not necessarily carry equal weight I would feel uneasy where it's a struggle to follow or understand what's offered as guidance.

Surely it is logical to expect a spiritually-evolved communicator to be highly aware of the need for simple clarity? So if that simple clarity isn't on display might one be forgiven in thinking the communicator may not be all that is claimed or suggested?
 
Top