Why should we trust channeled information?

[paragon]

Hi all,

So many people on this forum claim to be channeling information from various celestial sources. The difficulty I have with it is, no two sources ever agree on everything - and many sources disagree on a lot of things! Just for fun I'd love to try and meld all these channeled sources together into one belief system - it would end up as a load of befuddled nonsense, no doubt.

Even some of the most universally held spiritual beliefs are up for debate, according to channelers. Possibly the single most universal spiritual belief is karma, yet there's at least one popular psychic/writer who claims karma does not exist. Reincarnation is another similarly universal spiritual belief, yet Christian mystics experience vivid apparitions that fully accord with the Christian teaching of only a single lifetime.

There are only two explanations I can summon for this that do not appear to be a complete affront to logic. Those are:

1) Channeling is either entirely sourced from, or heavily influenced by the channeler's subconscious beliefs and the collective consciousness. If it is partly sourced from truth then the channeler's level of consciousness would appear to determine how much of this truth is accessible.

2) Whoever/whatever lies beyond the celestial curtain does not want us to know the true nature of reality, as the nature of the divine plan requires that we live in ignorance. Thus it disseminates conflicting information as a message that the complete truth is not ours to know on this side of the curtain.

How else can we logically interpret such a multitude of differing, incompatible opinions?

If you are a channeler: knowing that others are having similarly vivid experiences, on what basis do you assume that your visions are correct but others' are not?

Thank you very much for reading - hope you have a blessed day and I look forward to reading your views.

[JosephineB]

The advice I've got is to use your own inner guidance. If it doesn't make sense to you, if the feeling is off or that it doesn't fit right with you, then go with that.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by paragon

Hi all,

So many people on this forum claim to be channeling information from various celestial sources. The difficulty I have with it is, no two sources ever agree on everything - and many sources disagree on a lot of things! Just for fun I'd love to try and meld all these channeled sources together into one belief system - it would end up as a load of befuddled nonsense, no doubt.

Even some of the most universally held spiritual beliefs are up for debate, according to channelers. Possibly the single most universal spiritual belief is karma, yet there's at least one popular psychic/writer who claims karma does not exist. Reincarnation is another similarly universal spiritual belief, yet Christian mystics experience vivid apparitions that fully accord with the Christian teaching of only a single lifetime.

There are only two explanations I can summon for this that do not appear to be a complete affront to logic. Those are:

1) Channeling is either entirely sourced from, or heavily influenced by the channeler's subconscious beliefs and the collective consciousness. If it is partly sourced from truth then the channeler's level of consciousness would appear to determine how much of this truth is accessible.

2) Whoever/whatever lies beyond the celestial curtain does not want us to know the true nature of reality, as the nature of the divine plan requires that we live in ignorance. Thus it disseminates conflicting information as a message that the complete truth is not ours to know on this side of the curtain.

How else can we logically interpret such a multitude of differing, incompatible opinions?

If you are a channeler: knowing that others are having similarly vivid experiences, on what basis do you assume that your visions are correct but others' are not?

Thank you very much for reading - hope you have a blessed day and I look forward to reading your views.

That's a difficult one to answer, because many religious texts are channelled, or at least divinely inspired, with the most obvious example being the Quran. There was a whole lot of controversy with the Satanic Verses, passages of the Quran that were later removed, because Mohammed claimed he was deceived by Satan into thinking the passages were dictated by Archangel Gabriel, when in fact it was Satan himself trying to get in on the action. That remains a problem with all channelled material, because you just don't know who is on the other side and no real way of verifying it. Astral beings are notorious for being tricksters, no doubt most people who channel are actually in contact with deceivers. One way to test those on the other end would be to see what their actual actions are, rather than their words.

E.g.

- Do they bring positive change into your life and those around you?
- Do they visit others when you ask them to?
- Can they perform healing or energy work, which you would associate with higher beings?
- Can they manifest results without any great effort, when you ask them to? - What kind of "vibe" do they give off, is it higher-vibratory, loving and benevolent or discombobulated, disharmonious and lower-vibratory?

There is also the matter of channelling being a skill, it takes many years of practice to master any your initial efforts may be less than satisfactory. The Ego also likes to intervene and insert its own biases, expectations, world-views, etc... Many people who tried channelling have failed at it, David Wilcock (aka the reincarnation of Edgar Cayce) being the first one that springs to mind.

[paragon]

Originally Posted by JosephineBloggs

The advice I've got is to use your own inner guidance. If it doesn't make sense to you, if the feeling is off or that it doesn't fit right with you, then go with that.

Thank you for the reply. I guess in the end that's what we all do - we all end up making our own judgments on these things, even if that judgment is to decide that we don't know.

The main reason I'm asking is because my concerns usually cause me to throw all channeled information into my mental garbage bin - but I'm wondering if there's some purpose for this information that I've missed.

[JosephineB]

even if that judgment is to decide that we don't know

I agree with that for sure. I've had a slight glimpse of channeling myself, so I'm not totally closed to the idea. Not saying that you are closed to it btw.

[paragon]

Originally Posted by NoOne

That's a difficult one to answer, because many religious texts are channelled, or at least divinely inspired, with the most obvious example being the Quran. There was a whole lot of controversy with the Satanic Verses, passages of the Quran that were later removed, because Mohammed claimed he was deceived by Satan into thinking the passages were dictated by Archangel Gabriel, when in fact it was Satan himself trying to get in on the action. That remains a problem with all channelled material, because you just don't know who is on the other side and no real way of verifying it. Astral beings are notorious for being tricksters, no doubt most people who channel are actually in contact with deceivers. One way to test those on the other end would be to see what their actual actions are, rather than their words.

E.g.

- Do they bring positive change into your life and those around you?
- Do they visit others when you ask them to?
- Can they perform healing or energy work, which you would associate with higher beings?
- Can they manifest results without any great effort, when you ask them to? - What kind of "vibe" do they give off, is it higher-vibratory, loving and benevolent or discombobulated, disharmonious and lower-vibratory?

There is also the matter of channelling being a skill, it takes many years of practice to master any your initial efforts may be less than satisfactory. The Ego also likes to intervene and insert its own biases, expectations, world-views, etc... Many people who tried channelling have failed at it, David Wilcock (aka the reincarnation of Edgar Cayce) being the first one that springs to mind.

Thank you, NoOne. Your reply makes a lot of sense to me, although since we can't be certain of any of those things on your checklist unless the information was channeled by ourselves (and perhaps even then we can't know for sure!) it does tend to give weight to my "mental garbage bin" policy.

I'm glad you mentioned the Koran as that's a great example - it's regarded by many spiritual people, whether Muslim or not, as being an inspired text. Yet it's completely incompatible with the Bible and many other spiritual texts and contains many vile passages - particularly in the latter half, and particularly in its treatment of infidels. I can't see how any dogmatic, exclusivist text like that could possibly have any place in any sort of pluralistic spiritual view. By its very nature it completely defies any sort of pluralist interpretation.

Not trying to start a debate on the Koran here - just reiterating my previous question from a different angle: how can we accept differing sources that are logically completely incompatible with each other?

Super bonus points for using the word "discombobulated". There needs to be more of that in the world.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by paragon

Thank you, NoOne. Your reply makes a lot of sense to me, although since we can't be certain of any of those things on your checklist unless the information was channeled by ourselves (and perhaps even then we can't know for sure!) it does tend to give weight to my "mental garbage bin" policy.

I'm glad you mentioned the Koran as that's a great example - it's regarded by many spiritual people, whether Muslim or not, as being an inspired text. Yet it's completely incompatible with the Bible and many other spiritual texts and contains many vile passages - particularly in the latter half, and particularly in its treatment of infidels. I can't see how any dogmatic, exclusivist text like that could possibly have any place in any sort of pluralistic spiritual view. By its very nature it completely defies any sort of pluralist interpretation.

Not trying to start a debate on the Koran here - just reiterating my previous question from a different angle: how can we accept differing sources that are logically completely incompatible with each other?

Super bonus points for using the word "discombobulated". There needs to be more of that in the world.

Thank you Paragon.

Btw, your reply to me was your 33rd post, that is a Kundalini / Goddess number, which follows me around all the time.

I speak from experience here, I tried my hand at channelling, with mixed results. On the plus side, I was hounded off another forum in a literal witch-hunt, for my efforts

I try to avoid channelling these days, as it is simply not a reliable way of communicating with higher powers. There simply are no words to express what goes on once you move beyond ordinary 3 D reality. What I do, is commune. It is an exchange of thought, feeling, information and energy, all happening on a higher-dimensional plane.

Legrand would know what I'm talking about, because he does it too

It is just utter bliss beyond anything that can be experienced in the physical realm.

[paragon]

Originally Posted by NoOne

Thank you Paragon.

Btw, your reply to me was your 33rd post, that is a Kundalini / Goddess number, which follows me around all the time.

I speak from experience here, I tried my hand at channelling, with mixed results. On the plus side, I was hounded off another forum in a literal witch-hunt, for my efforts

I try to avoid channelling these days, as it is simply not a reliable way of communicating with higher powers. There simply are no words to express what goes on once you move beyond ordinary 3 D reality. What I do, is commune. It is an exchange of thought, feeling, information and energy, all happening on a higher-dimensional plane.

Legrand would know what I'm talking about, because he does it too

It is just utter bliss beyond anything that can be experienced in the physical realm.

Interesting - I used to get stalked by 33 a lot too, though not as much lately.

Communing sounds fascinating - perhaps one day I will experience it. The inability to express what is behind the curtain comes closer to my own understanding of things (not from experience, just from reason).

[paragon]

Originally Posted by paragon

Interesting - I used to get stalked by 33 a lot too, though not as much lately.

Communing sounds fascinating - perhaps one day I will experience it. The inability to express what is behind the curtain comes closer to my own understanding of things (not from experience, just from reason).

And whatd'yaknow.... I posted that at 8.33am That was not planned!

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by paragon

Interesting - I used to get stalked by 33 a lot too, though not as much lately.

Communing sounds fascinating - perhaps one day I will experience it. The inability to express what is behind the curtain comes closer to my own understanding of things (not from experience, just from reason).

One can try, but every time we try to talk about the absolute, the ineffable, incandescent reality that lies behind the curtain, it somehow never seems to do justice to the actual thing we are trying to describe.

I realise now that using language is limiting and is best avoided, or kept to a minimum. I merge with the Universal form of the Goddess and this is how we "Are". There really is no doing, no teacher or student, it is just a state of being, existing as the Absolute.

And whatd'yaknow.... I posted that at 8.33am That was not planned!

Yeah, that keeps happening to me all the time, along with 11 - 22 and so forth. It is so common nowadays that I barely notice it. It is the Goddess's way of letting me know she is always here for me.