Quote:
|
Originally Posted by inavalan
You haven't offended me. I just commented about your sententious commenting. I don't affiliate myself with psychics or mediums, and I believe that there are quite a number of fakes and self-deluded among those who pretend to be. It is just you can't say that about all of them.
|
Thanks for your reply.
Not sure if you read my whole post or just Miss Hepburn's quote, but I didn't actually say that about all of them. I said there are genuine psychics. Channelers - not so in my experience. If they can't produce a single, consistent message throughout their various channelings then the only logical conclusion I can come up with is that they don't possess a channel to the single, eternal, immutable truth - but rather to some other spiritual reservoir not in the realm of the absolute. I don't deny the possibility that a few exceptionally gifted people might possess this channel, but we don't appear to have any absolute, objective criteria by which to determine which revelations are genuine. Even Christ and Buddha - two of the greatest masters ever to live - have many aspects to their teaching that don't agree.
Additional: just saw your edit with the points about why channeled information is distorted. Seems like we practically agree in what we're saying anyway. You say it all comes from source but is distorted by our ego, beliefs etc. etc. I say that's possible, but given the information is distorted, I see no reason to assume it's from the Source just because the channeler sees it that way. It's not really that important anyway; it appears we agree that the information is distorted which is the main point I was making.