member responses and conversations - general

There are certain questions asked of mediums and the one concerning pets is a regular based on what I've learned. The key is that if we loved a pet that love will draw the animal to us after we have passed over. Just as with humankind, love is all.....

The way an animal is animated by its spirit is not so very different from the way it is for humans although the spiritual progress of the animal's animating spirit is somewhat different. It's not important to understand that situation but it may be of interest to some.

I also believe that love seems to be the key in keeping in touch with our pets on the other side. I had another sign today when I went on my Insta- one of the accounts that I follow (Simon’s Cat) appeared with a cat and butterfly animation which was so lovely. Again, I wasn’t expecting to see this but it came up almost instantaneously on my feed. Some might call it coincidence but it still brings me reassurance that my cat appears to be communicating. ❤️
 

mareke

New Member
I think it would still meet this website's rules to discuss the nature of Jesus and what is reported to have happened to him. Those matters are not in themselves religious so much as reported ancient history and manifestations and appearances are subjects we already discuss here on ALF.

What would be unacceptable, though, under the rules Roberta laid out for her website would be conversations about and/or comparisons of the religions that grew from those events two millennia in the past.

What little we know of the man known as Jesus suggests he was mortal, an incarnate like ourselves. If so then his death would, as with ourselves, have involved the irreversible parting of body and spirit when the so-called silver cord broke. We don't know what happened in his so-called resurrection or what followers saw later. If he was not an incarnate like ourselves then all bets are off.

Mikey has offered his version/interpretation of those events of 2000 years ago and we are naturally free to accept or reject what he says.
Following on from your reply Mac it’s a sensitive issue because of the large number of people around the world heavily invested in a world view that the Jesus of the bible died to atone for their sins. Any view by Mikey that clashed with the bible would potentially alienate these people. This is why rather than putting Mikey in a difficult position by asking him to reveal the truth about spiritual leaders like Christ, Buddha etc. I asked whether we will be able to discover the truth for ourselves.

Seth a highly advanced soul channeled by Jane Roberts had no qualms about presenting a view of Jesus that clashed with the traditional bible view. According to Seth the story of Christ in the bible wasn't accurate and the Christ personality was a synthesis of several historical figures: John the Baptist, the apostle Paul and a historical Christ who was never crucified. Seth claimed that someone agreed to take Christ’s place to fulfill the biblical prophecies about the coming of a saviour. The person was drugged to lessen the pain of the ordeal of being crucified while the historical Christ left for places unknown-probably Asia where he apparently spent some of his earlier years gaining wisdom.

The view that Seth expressed enraged fundamentalist Christians who insist that the Christ story is historically accurate and that the bible account of Jesus performing miracles, dying on the cross to atone for our sins etc. is literally true. They responded by painting Roberts as the devil’s disciple and Seth as the devil. Seth intended to channel a book through Jane Roberts detailing the life of the real Jesus but Roberts died before he could do so. I and others whose world views are fluid would have liked to have read the book had Seth been able to complete it.

The gospels were written 80 years after Christ so the writers could claim anything they liked with no-one who was alive when Jesus was alive around to challenge their views. My own view is similar to yours Mac i.e. that Jesus was a mortal man like the rest of us (not born of a virgin) but a highly advanced soul. I don’t believe that we can rely on Jesus’s 'sacrifice' to atone for our sins. I believe that we 'save' ourselves by our own efforts to evolve spiritually. When I once expressed my views to my church going fundamentalist Christian half-brother he responded that God destroys people with views like mine and that we are saved by Jesus’ sacrifice rather than by our own efforts. One man’s meat is another man’s poison!

It’s a problem not solely confined to Christianity and arises because people are at different stages of spiritual growth.

Scott Peck in his book ‘The Different Drum’ (pages 187-203) recognised 4 stages of spiritual growth.

STAGE I:
Chaotic, antisocial. Frequently pretenders; they pretend they are loving and pious, covering up their lack of principles. Although they may pretend to be loving (and think of themselves that way), their relationships with their fellow human beings are all essentially manipulative and self-serving. They really don't give a hoot about anyone else.

STAGE II:
Formal, institutional, fundamental. Beginning the work of submitting themselves to principle-the law, but they do not yet understand the spirit of the law, consequently they are legalistic, parochial, and dogmatic. They are threatened by anyone who thinks differently from them, as they have the "truth," and so regard it as their responsibility to convert or save the other 90 or 99 percent of humanity who are not "true believers."

STAGE III:
Skeptic, individual, questioner, including atheists, agnostics and those scientifically minded who demand a measurable, well researched and logical explanation. Although frequently "nonbelievers," people in Stage III are generally more spiritually developed than many content to remain in Stage II. Although individualistic, they are not the least bit antisocial. To the contrary, they are often deeply involved in and committed to social causes. They make up their own minds about things and are no more likely to believe everything they read in the papers than to believe it is necessary for someone to acknowledge Jesus as Lord and Savior (as opposed to Buddha or Mao or Socrates) in order to be saved.

STAGE IV:
Mystic, communal. Out of love and commitment to the whole, using their ability to transcend their backgrounds, culture and limitations with all others, reaching toward the notion of world community and the possibility of either transcending culture or -- depending on which way you want to use the words -- belonging to a planetary culture. They may be religious but not looking for clear cut, proto type answers, and desiring to enter into the mystery of uncertainty, living in the unknown.
 
Last edited:

mac

Administrator
The above posting is on the edge of being acceptable because it's beginning to talk about religion/faith/belief generally and mentions Christianity specifically. Any response to the material in that posting will be removed if it follows any similar theme.

Members wishing to be involved in such discussions will find a ready forum over on website owner Roberta's blog or here https://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/index.php.

The 'mission statement' for AfterLifeForums is: "AfterLifeForums is an online, interactive community designed to give seekers direct access to prominent researchers, to afterlife literature, and to one another in order to foster both spiritual growth and public interest in life after death." Put simply, ALF is about survival and what follows and our developing spiritually in that context.
 
Last edited:

Carol and Mikey

Golden Hearts
Following on from your reply Mac it’s a sensitive issue because of the large number of people around the world heavily invested in a world view that the Jesus of the bible died to atone for their sins. Any view by Mikey that clashed with the bible would potentially alienate these people. This is why rather than putting Mikey in a difficult position by asking him to reveal the truth about spiritual leaders like Christ, Buddha etc. I asked whether we will be able to discover the truth for ourselves.

Seth a highly advanced soul channeled by Jane Roberts had no qualms about presenting a view of Jesus that clashed with the traditional bible view. According to Seth the story of Christ in the bible wasn't accurate and the Christ personality was a synthesis of several historical figures: John the Baptist, the apostle Paul and a historical Christ who was never crucified. Seth claimed that someone agreed to take Christ’s place to fulfill the biblical prophecies about the coming of a saviour. The person was drugged to lessen the pain of the ordeal of being crucified while the historical Christ left for places unknown-probably Asia where he apparently spent some of his earlier years gaining wisdom.

The view that Seth expressed enraged fundamentalist Christians who insist that the Christ story is historically accurate and that the bible account of Jesus performing miracles, dying on the cross to atone for our sins etc. is literally true. They responded by painting Roberts as the devil’s disciple and Seth as the devil. Seth intended to channel a book through Jane Roberts detailing the life of the real Jesus but Roberts died before he could do so. I and others whose world views are fluid would have liked to have read the book had Seth been able to complete it.

The gospels were written 80 years after Christ so the writers could claim anything they liked with no-one who was alive when Jesus was alive around to challenge their views. My own view is similar to yours Mac i.e. that Jesus was a mortal man like the rest of us (not born of a virgin) but a highly advanced soul. I don’t believe that we can rely on Jesus’s 'sacrifice' to atone for our sins. I believe that we 'save' ourselves by our own efforts to evolve spiritually. When I once expressed my views to my church going fundamentalist Christian half-brother he responded that God destroys people with views like mine and that we are saved by Jesus’ sacrifice rather than by our own efforts. One man’s meat is another man’s poison!

It’s a problem not solely confined to Christianity and arises because people are at different stages of spiritual growth.

Scott Peck in his book ‘The Different Drum’ (pages 187-203) recognised 4 stages of spiritual growth.

STAGE I:
Chaotic, antisocial. Frequently pretenders; they pretend they are loving and pious, covering up their lack of principles. Although they may pretend to be loving (and think of themselves that way), their relationships with their fellow human beings are all essentially manipulative and self-serving. They really don't give a hoot about anyone else.

STAGE II:
Formal, institutional, fundamental. Beginning the work of submitting themselves to principle-the law, but they do not yet understand the spirit of the law, consequently they are legalistic, parochial, and dogmatic. They are threatened by anyone who thinks differently from them, as they have the "truth," and so regard it as their responsibility to convert or save the other 90 or 99 percent of humanity who are not "true believers."

STAGE III:
Skeptic, individual, questioner, including atheists, agnostics and those scientifically minded who demand a measurable, well researched and logical explanation. Although frequently "nonbelievers," people in Stage III are generally more spiritually developed than many content to remain in Stage II. Although individualistic, they are not the least bit antisocial. To the contrary, they are often deeply involved in and committed to social causes. They make up their own minds about things and are no more likely to believe everything they read in the papers than to believe it is necessary for someone to acknowledge Jesus as Lord and Savior (as opposed to Buddha or Mao or Socrates) in order to be saved.

STAGE IV:
Mystic, communal. Out of love and commitment to the whole, using their ability to transcend their backgrounds, culture and limitations with all others, reaching toward the notion of world community and the possibility of either transcending culture or -- depending on which way you want to use the words -- belonging to a planetary culture. They may be religious but not looking for clear cut, proto type answers, and desiring to enter into the mystery of uncertainty, living in the unknown.
Hi Mareke,
Trust me, I've been thrown under the bus a few times with what I do! I too was told that it was the devil I was talking to and not my son. It is me much more than Mikey that cannot go too much into that subject regarding Jesus. In Mikey's book, he did say that , "saying Jesus is your Savior does not give you a pass and spiritual growth, but rather trying to live what he taught is what truly makes the difference in regards to spiritual growth." Mikey touched on a few things in the book and compared Jesus and Buddha with how similar their teachings are, but again he knows where I'm coming from and my hesitation. It's what they taught that is significant. It's tough out there! Even writing the book took some serious courage! But onward I go!
Carol
 

bluebird

Major Contributor
"In Mikey's book, he did say that 'saying Jesus is your Savior does not give you a pass and spiritual growth, but rather trying to live what he taught is what truly makes the difference in regards to spiritual growth.'"

AMEN!!
 

mac

Administrator
Yes, agreed, and it's not even necessary to have succeeded providing effort has been made to try to live the way Jesus and other teachers have taught. Perhaps only a comparative few achieve much success but many, many more will have tried and they will have progressed spiritually because of their efforts.
 

mac

Administrator
I was reading recently a letter a letter published in 1995 'correcting' points I had made in an earlier edition of the then-weekly newspaper 'Psychic News'.

In it the writer referred to "my mistake" in thinking Jesus to be just a "highly evolved individual". The writer then went on to say that "Hafed, a Prince of Persia and Arch Magus of that country 2000 years ago", knew Jesus well (sometimes referred to him as 'the Nazarene') and says Hafed "emphatically declares Jesus to be the Supreme Prince, not only of the spirit world and of the earth, but of all planets and universes in existence". The writer went further to say that the body of Jesus was not like that of other mortals hence it was necessary for him to have born of a virgin. Hmmm....

I think it shows how muddled folk can become about Jesus, about his 'status' and his spiritual nature. Absolutely none of us has any detailed knowledge of the true nature of that individual, only ideas picked up whenever and wherever. Some of those ideas will be hopelessly wrong and some may be correct but you won't know which is which!
 

bluebird

Major Contributor
Agreed, mac. Not to mention the misogny inherent in the idea that Jesus "must" have been born of a virgin, and the apparent inability of some people to understand that multiple mistranslations -- both accidental and intentional -- have occurred in the text of the bible over so many years. The Hebrew word meaning "young woman" (אישה צעירה, or almah) was mistranslated as "virgin", thereby creating the false myth of a virgin birth.
 

mac

Administrator
From what I've read in the past mistranslations abound in texts of all sorts. It shouldn't be surprising because translating accurately from just one language to one other can be difficult enough.

I suppose telepathic communication in the etheric dimensions would avoid spoken/written word translation difficulties but even communication via telepathy may still be susceptible to being misunderstood.
 

mac

Administrator
I was recently half-listening to a discussion on BBC Radio when I heard its contributors discussing the man Jesus and how the west often portrays the guy as having had light coloured skin and blue eyes.

Yes of course they're only representations but how unrealistic are they when it's obvious - I suggest - that his skin, hair and eye colors would be closer to those of the people living in the region he was born into and especially to those of his parents?

Add all that to many unprovable stories and myths and we end up with a hopelessly inaccurate impression of the guy.
 
Top