Harmfulness of the Archangel Michael channelling [Archive]

View Full Version : Harmfulness of the Archangel Michael channelling

magna1o3@...

08-29-2001, 04:14 PM

--- in asc2k@y..., "jeremy weiland" <jweiland@n...> wrote:
> but which is more important - the message or the source?
>
> shouldn't truth be able to speak for itself? and if it doesn't, can you
> tell us which parts you think are harmful distortions? i didn't see
> anything in the reading that i would consider harmful - yet i understand
> that the ways of negatives can be very subtle.
>
> maybe my heart is not completely open, but there were things in that
> reading that i found helpful (despite the blatant advertisements at the end
> of the email).
>
> jeremy

if it is true, the message and the source will be the same.

the archangel michael message is sophistic, as are the majority of channelled
messages.

to the discerning eye it may be seen that the general tendency of the message in
question is to inflate the ego and complicate the mind with tinselly 'truth and
water' (but mostly water - murky water). it may also be observed that certain
'assurances' in the message are rather depressing (and so innately untrue,
because the truth always inspires), e.g. "...you have a long journey ahead of
you".

the message is really just noise, and there is much more that could be said, but
like julie rose, i cannot force myself to read it. it is as if my soul is not at
all attracted. the whole message feels dead to me and a little sickening.

the message certainly does not contain holy wisdom. it does not inspire the
spiritual heart or instruct the mind with true or useful knowledge.

one may also find certain things 'helpful' that adolf hitler wrote in his magnum
opus, 'mein kampf', but does that mean that it is the better material to read if
one is in pursuit of wisdom?

"there are seekers of truth, and these may called seekers of wisdom, and then
there are seekers of opinion." - unknown.

celestine

Jeremy Weiland

08-29-2001, 04:53 PM

>if it is true, the message and the source will be the same.

i don't understand what you mean. yeah, jesus could come down here and
dictate for us, and then we'd know exactly how kosher the source and message
is, but as long as we have to deal with channels, the source is *always*
going to be a *little* sketchy.

>to the discerning eye it may be seen that the general tendency of the
message in question is to inflate the ego and complicate the mind with
tinselly 'truth and water' (but mostly water - murky water). it may also be
observed that certain 'assurances' in the message are rather depressing (and
so innately untrue, because the truth always inspires), e.g. "...you have a
long journey ahead of you".

to a discerning eye, no threat would exist because one would be able to
"discern" between the truth and water, and then not take the water for
truth, right?

but then, truth is entirely subjective, so that one person may find
something helpful that is harmful to another. so it's hard to make blanket
statements about anything, really.

>the message is really just noise, and there is much more that could be
said, but like julie rose, i cannot force myself to read it. it is as if my
soul is not at all attracted. the whole message feels dead to me and a
little sickening.

then by all means do not read it read. i do agree that channelled
material should not be thrust into list members mailboxes, but the link
should be posted instead so people can take it at their own pace and not get
it without warning.

>the message certainly does not contain holy wisdom. it does not inspire the
spiritual heart or instruct the mind with true or useful knowledge.

so you don't think that there's a subjective component at all to this?
let me elaborate: to me and you, who've obviously read channeled material
before, this stuff is a dime a dozen, and we'll hold out for only the best,
cause the rest is a waste of time for us. i wholeheartedly agree with you
that, in general, the reading was not too helpful. but for an evangelical
christian who's never been exposed to any new age material and is on the
cusp of interest in the deeper meanings of his/her religion, this could be a
godsend, since it could serve to introduce him/her to new ideas and serve as
a springboard to interest in potentially enlightening new age ideas?
there's more to a reading's subjectivity than that, but it's true that one
man's poison is another's medicine.

>one may also find certain things 'helpful' that adolf hitler wrote in his
magnum opus, 'mein kampf', but does that mean that it is the better material
to read if one is in pursuit of wisdom?

well, people don't read mein kampf when they are in pursuit of wisdom,
nor do any entities that i've heard of channel it. i'm not saying read
every piece of channelled material without discretion, or trusting inner
guidance. i'm not even saying that your statement in the original email was
wrong (that the reading was negatively oriented). i was simply asking what
about it made it bad. and i *do* believe that anything has the potential to
be helpful or harmful depending on use, intention, etc.

jeremy

jonnabradley

08-29-2001, 05:19 PM

<table bgcolor="#ffffff">
>jeremy,
>
>sorry, but to jump into the discussion with celestine (hello again, simon) i have to add to the paragraph below that "there ain't no time" for that malarky. right, simon? even the christians need to be told the truth and told it now without all the flowery gibberish that goes along with typical channelled information. most channellings are ego driven gobbledygook that people spout out just to get attention. who's to argue with them they they aren't channelling an "angel" like michael? it's like saying god is dead, how blasphemous!
>
>i went to that site and began to read that "channelling" and couldn't go farther than the first "my beloveds" and "so and so reading her e-mail"!? please! 
>
>all channelled material is to be digested within and much discernment used to come to a personal truth of the material. 
>
>j
>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
>
>nothing real can be threatened.
nothing unreal exists.
<blockquote style="border-left: #800000 2px solid; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; padding-right: 0px">
so you don't think that there's a subjective component at all to this?
let me elaborate: to me and you, who've obviously read channeled material
before, this stuff is a dime a dozen, and we'll hold out for only the best,
cause the rest is a waste of time for us. i wholeheartedly agree with you
that, in general, the reading was not too helpful. but for an evangelical
christian who's never been exposed to any new age material and is on the
cusp of interest in the deeper meanings of his/her religion, this could be a
godsend, since it could serve to introduce him/her to new ideas and serve as
a springboard to interest in potentially enlightening new age ideas?
there's more to a reading's subjectivity than that, but it's true that one
man's poison is another's medicine.
</blockquote>

David Wilcock

08-29-2001, 08:00 PM

<table bgcolor="#ffffff">
>from: jonnabradley [mailto:jonnabradley@yahoo.com]

even the christians need to be told the truth and told it now without all the flowery gibberish that goes along with typical channelled information.

>[david wilcock]your use of the word "need" becomes very dicey if you're trying to be able to adapt to that last stage of awareness before the return to oneness, the seventh density "sacramental nature of all things" understanding. (incidentally, the beings that live in that level would never be directly channeled by humans, according to ra, but they do serve the 6d beings who in turn serve lower densities, which are typically the entities most people log onto if they're working positively.)
>
>i think the key point is in ra's quote, "without the potential for misunderstanding, there would be no experience." the 7d or crown chakra understanding is that all is sacramental - all. we've all been snookered by false appearances at various times, and sooner or later we get the message - we have the experience. if people are taken in by postcard channeling, sooner or later they'll start to realize that there are gross inconsistencies and they'll begin searching for the christ within instead of without. 
>
>most channellings are ego driven gobbledygook that people spout out just to get attention. who's to argue with them they they aren't channelling an "angel" like michael? it's like saying god is dead

>[david wilcock]i agree that there is nothing worse than a channel who spins a whole world around themselves - especially when their material is used to make them "supreme commander" of the earth raising efforts, et cetera. i've had many, many people with "messiah complex" want to get involved with my work, get my phone number, et cetera - and it's not really about me as much as it is about them. they see what i'm doing, they believe in it, they think that i'm someone of value to the service of planetary healing and they want in on the team - they launch romantic propositions, business propositions, claim secret or advanced knowledge that i "need" to have, et cetera, claim that they knew me in a past life. i've heard every possible enticement you can imagine and it gets tiring - there was another example very recently of someone wanting to procure my phone number and basically thinking that since they didn't have internet access, they needed to get my information over the phone... but then the deeper layer of it was that they essentially wanted a free reading to validate that they were this very important person, et cetera et cetera.
>
>the funny thing about all of this is that there are people far more popular in this field than i, and they are still unknown and it will probably remain that way right up until the shift itself. some new agers i run into have never even heard of art bell at all, much less listen to the show. so it's rather ridiculous for any one person to think that they're ever really going to make such a cross-cultural multimedia worldwide consciousness change. the internet can help people, but that is only a small percentage of the world population and it is so flooded with data that hardly anyone could rise to any level of exposure. essentially, the media isdriven by the forces of commerce and big business, and someone trying to minister to the planet isn't suitable for profits. even oprah oscillates between dr. phil one day and how to win big buying and selling antiques the next.
>
>
>went to that site and began to read that "channelling" and couldn't go farther than the first "my beloveds" and "so and so reading her e-mail"!? please! all channelled material is to be digested within and much discernment used to come to a personal truth of the material.

>[david wilcock]or as i like to say, find the best teachers you know of and then find out what they are reading for inspiration. since i'm into jazz drumming, i thought at one time that dave weckl was the fastest, most technically fantastic drummer i had ever heard - no one could possibly be better than he was. since my father is a music journalist and i met all the famous people backstage growing up, such as in rock and roll, pop, et cetera, about two a month on average, i had a chance to meet weckl. i remember looking at his drumset and expecting that he had some super-class bass drum pedal that was better than the normal yamaha double pedal - but it was the same. then i asked him who he listened to, who he was inspired by, and of course he mentioned many of the older greats of jazz, including vinnie colaiuta, jack dejohnette, max roach, buddy rich, peter erskine, steve gadd, et cetera. then when i thought about it more i realized that weckl was like a machine, but what he really wanted was to figure out how to use that incredible technique that he had to get the "human" feel that these other drummers had. and i do think that he's made a lot of progress in that respect in the ten years since i met him.
>
>ok, i'm off on some wild tangent, time to sign off -
>
>peace be with you -
>
>- david
>
<blockquote>
>j
>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
>
>nothing real can be threatened.
nothing unreal exists.
<blockquote style="padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; border-left: #800000 2px solid; margin-right: 0px">
so you don't think that there's a subjective component at all to this?
let me elaborate: to me and you, who've obviously read channeled material
before, this stuff is a dime a dozen, and we'll hold out for only the best,
cause the rest is a waste of time for us. i wholeheartedly agree with you
that, in general, the reading was not too helpful. but for an evangelical
christian who's never been exposed to any new age material and is on the
cusp of interest in the deeper meanings of his/her religion, this could be a
godsend, since it could serve to introduce him/her to new ideas and serve as
a springboard to interest in potentially enlightening new age ideas?
there's more to a reading's subjectivity than that, but it's true that one
man's poison is another's medicine.
</blockquote>

<tt>to unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
asc2k-unsubscribe@egroups.com

</tt>

<tt>your use of yahoo! groups is subject to the yahoo! terms of service (http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/).</tt>
</blockquote>

Jeremy Weiland

08-29-2001, 08:26 PM

<table bgcolor="#ffffff">
> just as i was getting ready to reply to your email, jonna, i got david's, which pretty much was saying what i was trying to say. the point is that *everybody* on earth is going to be dealing with some distortion of truth - so the whole emphasis is on direction and momentum, rather than being at perfection already. sure, not every channeling is going to be of the highest caliber - but if it moves somebody in a less distorted direction, has it not served *some* purpose?
<blockquote style="border-left: #000000 2px solid; margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px">
>
>all channelled material is to be digested within and much discernment used to come to a personal truth of the material. 
>
>
>amen - which is why i get confused when people issue blanket statements about readings being bad. if the goal is to acquire personal truth - and not just to read the "right" readings - then (no offense but) they can't depend on your or celestine's opinion for that - they have to go within. and there will always be a potential for misunderstanding there, and likewise, growth. and also for differing opinions.
>
>>>nothing real can be threatened.
>>nothing unreal exists.
>
> this is *exactly* my point. there is no threat. everything is learning.
>
> thanks to you and celestine for a most interesting conversation!
>
> jeremy</blockquote>

jonnabradley

08-30-2001, 04:21 AM

<table bgcolor="#ffffff">
<blockquote style="border-left: #800000 2px solid; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; padding-right: 0px">
>
even the christians need to be told the truth and told it now without all the flowery gibberish that goes along with typical channelled information.

>[david wilcock]your use of the word "need" becomes very dicey if you're trying to be able to adapt to that last stage of awareness before the return to oneness, the seventh density "sacramental nature of all things" understanding. (incidentally, the beings that live in that level would never be directly channeled by humans, according to ra, but they do serve the 6d beings who in turn serve lower densities, which are typically the entities most people log onto if they're working positively.)
>
>i was using "need" because time is short. words are inadequate... those without certain knowledge are missing something vital. they "need" to have it presented to them in order that they might be exposed to in so they can make their choices. of course that's not to say they haven't been presented with it a hundred times and turned it down, but i've found that people who are "church people" tend to be very dogmatic and will look away and pray for people who have alternative, out-of-the-box ideas to share. maybe what they actually "need" is to open their eyes to what's out there already. therein lies the problem of crackerbox channells. if all channellers had to meet certain requirements (a la ra's crew) then the information would be able to be shared and channelling wouldn't have such a bad name.does material filtered through the densities lose some of it's oomph like it does in 3d? you ever watch that "secret" game being played? people line up and someone whispers a secret in ear #1 and they pass it down the line until it gets to the end. usually it comes out quite distorted from the original.
>
>i think the key point is in ra's quote, "without the potential for misunderstanding, there would be no experience." the 7d or crown chakra understanding is that all is sacramental - all. we've all been snookered by false appearances at various times, and sooner or later we get the message - we have the experience. if people are taken in by postcard channeling, sooner or later they'll start to realize that there are gross inconsistencies and they'll begin searching for the christ within instead of without. 
>
>i've gotten deep into the ra work and find it absolutely amazing. my problem with postcard channelling is related to the above, there's just not enough time for people to be sidetracked by it. but i know that everyone learns in their own way, so i'm sure that the people who need it will find it first and hope that they quickly bore of the sugar coating and move on.
>
>most channellings are ego driven gobbledygook that people spout out just to get attention. who's to argue with them they they aren't channelling an "angel" like michael? it's like saying god is dead

>[david wilcock]i agree that there is nothing worse than a channel who spins a whole world around themselves - especially when their material is used to make them "supreme commander" of the earth raising efforts, et cetera. i've had many, many people with "messiah complex" want to get involved with my work, get my phone number, et cetera - and it's not really about me as much as it is about them. they see what i'm doing, they believe in it, they think that i'm someone of value to the service of planetary healing and they want in on the team - they launch romantic propositions, business propositions, claim secret or advanced knowledge that i "need" to have, et cetera, claim that they knew me in a past life. i've heard every possible enticement you can imagine and it gets tiring - there was another example very recently of someone wanting to procure my phone number and basically thinking that since they didn't have internet access, they needed to get my information over the phone... but then the deeper layer of it was that they essentially wanted a free reading to validate that they were this very important person, et cetera et cetera.
>
>i don't doubt that for a moment. what a hassle. service to self at it's finest, masquarading as service to others.
>
>the funny thing about all of this is that there are people far more popular in this field than i, and they are still unknown and it will probably remain that way right up until the shift itself. some new agers i run into have never even heard of art bell at all, much less listen to the show. so it's rather ridiculous for any one person to think that they're ever really going to make such a cross-cultural multimedia worldwide consciousness change. the internet can help people, but that is only a small percentage of the world population and it is so flooded with data that hardly anyone could rise to any level of exposure. essentially, the media isdriven by the forces of commerce and big business, and someone trying to minister to the planet isn't suitable for profits. even oprah oscillates between dr. phil one day and how to win big buying and selling antiques the next.
>
>oprah's cool, but she's gotta cater to the masses rather than the few... unfortunate. but then again, her "masses" shows may attract new viewers that would then get exposed to her "few" shows. i love dr. phil, he certainly tells it like it is. what gets me is that people listen to dr. phil and won't listen to their own hearts. we all have the same information available to us!
>
>
>went to that site and began to read that "channelling" and couldn't go farther than the first "my beloveds" and "so and so reading her e-mail"!? please! all channelled material is to be digested within and much discernment used to come to a personal truth of the material.

>[david wilcock]or as i like to say, find the best teachers you know of and then find out what they are reading for inspiration. since i'm into jazz drumming, i thought at one time that dave weckl was the fastest, most technically fantastic drummer i had ever heard - no one could possibly be better than he was. since my father is a music journalist and i met all the famous people backstage growing up, such as in rock and roll, pop, et cetera, about two a month on average, i had a chance to meet weckl. i remember looking at his drumset and expecting that he had some super-class bass drum pedal that was better than the normal yamaha double pedal - but it was the same. then i asked him who he listened to, who he was inspired by, and of course he mentioned many of the older greats of jazz, including vinnie colaiuta, jack dejohnette, max roach, buddy rich, peter erskine, steve gadd, et cetera. then when i thought about it more i realized that weckl was like a machine, but what he really wanted was to figure out how to use that incredible technique that he had to get the "human" feel that these other drummers had. and i do think that he's made a lot of progress in that respect in the ten years since i met him.
>
>i think i was aboriginal in a previous life... drums drive me to another place and time. hmm.. if weckl was like a machine in search of a human feel, then where would his talent have derived from??
>
>ok, i'm off on some wild tangent, time to sign off -
>
>namaste'
>j</blockquote>

jonnabradley

08-30-2001, 04:23 AM

<table bgcolor="#ffffff">
>jeremy,
>don't you wish there was some way we could get up on a mountain top and shout the truth?
>
>hmmm..
>
>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
>
>nothing real can be threatened.
nothing unreal exists.
<blockquote style="border-left: #800000 2px solid; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; padding-right: 0px">
style="font: 10pt arial">----- original message -----
style="background: #e4e4e4; font: 10pt arial; font-color: black">from: jeremy weiland (jweiland@nettalon.com)
style="font: 10pt arial">to: asc2k@yahoogroups.com
style="font: 10pt arial">sent: wednesday, august 29, 2001 11:26 pm
style="font: 10pt arial">subject: re: [asc2k] harmfulness of the archangel michael channelling
>

> just as i was getting ready to reply to your email, jonna, i got david's, which pretty much was saying what i was trying to say. the point is that *everybody* on earth is going to be dealing with some distortion of truth - so the whole emphasis is on direction and momentum, rather than being at perfection already. sure, not every channeling is going to be of the highest caliber - but if it moves somebody in a less distorted direction, has it not served *some* purpose?
<blockquote style="border-left: #000000 2px solid; margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px">
>
>all channelled material is to be digested within and much discernment used to come to a personal truth of the material. 
>
>
>amen - which is why i get confused when people issue blanket statements about readings being bad. if the goal is to acquire personal truth - and not just to read the "right" readings - then (no offense but) they can't depend on your or celestine's opinion for that - they have to go within. and there will always be a potential for misunderstanding there, and likewise, growth. and also for differing opinions.
>
>>>nothing real can be threatened.
>>nothing unreal exists.
>
> this is *exactly* my point. there is no threat. everything is learning.
>
> thanks to you and celestine for a most interesting conversation!
>
> jeremy</blockquote>

<tt>to unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
asc2k-unsubscribe@egroups.com

</tt>

<tt>your use of yahoo! groups is subject to the yahoo! terms of service (http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/).</tt>
</blockquote>

Jeremy Weiland

08-30-2001, 06:18 AM

>> i was using "need" because time is short. words are inadequate...
those without certain >>knowledge are missing something vital. they "need"
to have it presented to them in order that >>they might be exposed to in so
they can make their choices. of course that's not to say they >>haven't
been presented with it a hundred times and turned it down, but i've found
that people

well, you can lead a horse to water...

as long as people have free will, then the only person that can be
responsible for one's learning and growing is that person him/herself. time
is short for this cycle, but if it's not the right time for these people to
move on, then it's not the right time. the people who need to get the info
are getting the info; the universe works.

remember also that ra says that people don't neccessarily have to be
conscious of all this new age stuff and the ascension and everything to move
on to 4d - they simply have to be 51% or more sto. that certainly doesn't
entail knowing the ins and out of channeling and crystals and what have you.
it's more important to radiate love in your everyday life so there is a
surplus of it around to influence these people who are on the cusp of sto
rather than trying to reach them intellectually.

but, again, just my opinion.

jeremy

jonna

08-30-2001, 07:31 AM

>
> well, you can lead a horse to water...
>
> as long as people have free will, then the only person that can be
> responsible for one's learning and growing is that person him/herself. time
> is short for this cycle, but if it's not the right time for these people to
> move on, then it's not the right time. the people who need to get the info
> are getting the info; the universe works.
>
> remember also that ra says that people don't neccessarily have to be
> conscious of all this new age stuff and the ascension and everything to move
> on to 4d - they simply have to be 51% or more sto. that certainly doesn't
> entail knowing the ins and out of channeling and crystals and what have you.
> it's more important to radiate love in your everyday life so there is a
> surplus of it around to influence these people who are on the cusp of sto
> rather than trying to reach them intellectually.
>
> but, again, just my opinion.
>
> jeremy

i agree, jeremy. it would be great for us all to go this time, as it's hard
to imagine some having to go through another 75,000 year cycle in 3d. i
wonder.. maybe i haven't gotten to it in the ra books yet, but will they
have to do another 75,000 years? or can they start from where they are and
just move up as their growth progresses?? have you found that out yet?

i believe like you, that part of our "service to others" is indeed in
letting our light shine. we may not even know how many others we touch with
simple kindness or loving thoughts or words. really, 51% isn't that much!
as opposed to the "service to self" folks that have to have.. what is it, 95
percent service to self in order to go to 4d in the s to s realm? sheesh...
those are some mighty powerful power monger control freaks!

__________________________________________________ _______
do you yahoo!?
get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Jeremy Weiland

08-30-2001, 10:08 AM

> i agree, jeremy. it would be great for us all to go this time, as it's
hard
> to imagine some having to go through another 75,000 year cycle in 3d.

hey, it would certainly be a disservice to an entity to put in a
position for which it is not prepared. putting a 3d person who is not
sufficiently polarized to into 4d and expecting it to progress would be the
equivalent of expecting a tree to learn and grow as a human in 3d.

there's nothing *bad* about not ascending - it's simply something one
has to be either prepared for or not. the only thing i'm concerned about is
creating an environment where people find it easier to polarize - which i
try to do by increasing the "ambient love" on this planet. the more ambient
love (high vibrations) that hit people in their individual lives, the more
likely they are to make decisions that will polarize them positively.

> wonder.. maybe i haven't gotten to it in the ra books yet, but will they
> have to do another 75,000 years? or can they start from where they are
and
> just move up as their growth progresses?? have you found that out yet?

well, my understanding is that most people will have to wait another 25k
years at least for the next harvest. they may or may not choose to move on
to 4d, and they also may or may not choose to even wait for the harvest, as
people have ascended themselves before. but, generally speaking, i believe
the cycles act as "cutoff points" to prevent events in a cycle from spinning
out of control and making sure that catalytic situations continue to occur
in 3d.

> i believe like you, that part of our "service to others" is indeed in
> letting our light shine.

and it's *so* much more important that people experience the light that
we radiate, as opposed to us shoving some new age doctrine down their
throats. if we send them the light they need, then they will begin to
experience the catalysts neccessary for them to polarize the way they're
supposed to. i'd rather the universe make that decision than i. :-)

jeremy