some things to consider

A forum housing typical questions about the Padgett Messages
User avatar
Geoff
Site Admin
Posts: 872
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 7:24 am
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Contact:

Re: some things to consider

Postby Geoff » Mon Jul 21, 2014 12:18 am

Angie wrote:So I wonder if a lot of channels and articles on your site are highly influenced by Christianity. And if they were written so that that influence was removed, how different they might be. The truths you claim might very well be Christian dogma and doctrine, packaged in a different form, which you say is loving but might not be when looked at under a microscope.

But maybe "the truth" is vastly so removed from your version of Christianity that it wouldn't be recognized.


Dear Angie,

I realise you cant read printed books, but I have a great many pdfs and E-Books of books listed that are not from "our sources." I don't think there is a single belief, or if there is, there would not be many, that I hold, that I have not discovered to exist in totally different sources. One of the reasons why I am so confident of what I say, is that its found in so many places. And yes you will find channelings from Yoganda, Sri Yukestwar and others here. But I agree the channeled messages I list here are essentially "Divine Love" sourced. Thats quite deliberate. This is a Divine Love site.

But Sandy has on her site, also several thousand messages, and from beings you never heard of, like ABC22, MNO8 or a Life Carrier, or a "Mentor" and so on. And yet Sandy and I have almost no difference in beliefs. We sometimes use different words, but our understanding is pretty much identical. You can find some of those channelings here: http://board.1111angels.com/viewforum.php?f=2

My list of books is here: http://new-birth.net/books.htm

One of the most substantial sources of spiritual information is the Urantia Book which I hold in high regard, but I don't hold it quite as highly as Padgett. (Sandy has the opposite view) I have compared the two books. The Urantia Book is 2000 pages of very fine print and takes at least three months to read. But in the end, its got the same story to tell as Padgett. Here is my comparison.

I think you are inferring here that I have tunnel vision. Nothing could be further from the Truth.

Angie wrote:I see a lot of channelings from Jesus, for example, but not from, say, Hathor or Zeus or Aphrodite or Kali or Cernunnos. They'd be coming at it from a Pagan perspective, you from a Christian one. Love might not be the be-all-end-all for them, but Christians seem to be preachy about love, for some reason.


There are indeed messages from people who dispute the message of Divine Love, or are decidedly non-christian.

Descartes

August Comte

And here is an ancient Greek: Aeschylus

And an Egyptian: Hakan

and Anaxylabis

Then Emerson 100 years later has not changed his mind about Divine Love

and neither has the Buddha

Its actually rather funny you criticise my site for being too Christian, and a whole bunch of fundamentalist Padgett folks criticise it for having too much foreign stuff. You cant please some folks, thats for sure.


Geoff
Love commands the universe. Man only resorts to control when love is missing.

Angie
New Friend
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 2:56 am

Re: some things to consider

Postby Angie » Mon Jul 21, 2014 12:55 am

I read all the ancient channelings long ago and wish they had a more prominent place on your site, but most of the site seems to be concepts influenced by Christianity, spirits who've converted to Christianity, spirits who're suffering and helped by Christian spirits, and channelers who are Christian. I wouldn't mind "divine love" so much if it were put in broad, non-denominational terms. For example, the terms Reiki, auras and energy are so general that they require no prayer to feel, restrictions to receive (as immortality does), or intellect to understand (unlike the thought adjustor in the Urantia book.) I get Reiki all the time, but I don't feel ecstatic bliss from it and try to convert the world. I get it, it's nice, I go about my day.

Padgett was Christian, divine love seems to be a Christian concept, and the Urantia book, though different, has the same essentials: growth of human potential, Jesus, progression up the spiritual ladder. Who's to say those aren't Christian concepts? Maybe those things aren't true at all and you just think they are. A thousand people can be wrong, you know. And the Padgett messages and the Urantia book are only 2 sources. There are plenty of new-age channelings (a lot of them claim to be Jesus and Mary and God). Oodles of Pagans who work with patron deities and get information from them drastically different from your sources. If you google the internet for "channeled messages", you'll get more material to fill a bazillion Urantia books, all claiming to be correct. You'll get millions of declarations that God is love and love is a force, not a being. So God is a loving force, according to those beliefs, with no such thing as good or evil, no differentiation between natural or divine love, everyone's divine and immortal no matter what.

Your beliefs, on the other hand, say that yes, God is a loving creator but is a "parent", a "being", or "only those who pray for divine love can enter the eternal kingdom." The "god our father created us in love" belief comes from the Bible. The Bible restricts entry into the celestial kingdom by saying, "only those who believe in Jesus may dwell here", while your version of the truth says "Only those who continually ask for the divine love may enter." Either way, it's love with restrictions, regardless of who's benefiting. I don't see that as love. A lot of contemporary channeled messages don't, either. And suppose God told you he's not humanity's parent? Then God as "divine parent" would be a biblical concept, not truth.

All I'm saying is: If every source on the planet claims to be right, how can you be so sure you're even partly right? It's just the certainty and conviction with which you make your statements that I have a beef with, that is all.

I've seen that 1111 site, and it looks dark to me. So I don't go there, but it might be for some people. And I'd never have the audacity to claim "Divine love is the only way! This is the truth! Not the absolute truth, mind you, but the truth!" It sounds incredibly egotistical to proclaim "this is true!" When maybe you'll get a message from somewhere that is so far out in left field from Christianity that you might go, "maybe that's true."

Example: What if Jesus came to you and said, "There's no such thing as divine love. Love is love, period. Immortality is free and noone needs to earn it by praying." You would be forced to consider that maybe, just maybe, the distinction between natural and divine love was a concept in Christianity, put there by an incorrect interpretation of Bible scriptures, just like they were misinterpreted through history. But by spirits or mortals claiming "do you want the divine love, or the mere natural love?" The use of the word "mere" implies that natural love is lower on the scale of progression, maybe not inferior but lower none the less, and further implies that it's more favorable for people to go the divine love route, since it's higher (and hence better) than the one you just compared it to, judging by how much it's talked about. But what if concepts like "lower and higher" didn't exist and were a product of one's own ego? And natural and divine love were equal, and the egoic distinction was done away with entirely?

It would be such a departure from your current stance of DL Christianity that you'd have to re-consider what is true and what is false. Your current stance might be "God changes not." Later, you'd get information saying "God changes all the time" or "God is nature" or something like that, and you'd have to think, "I thought all my life that God changes not. Now that might all be a lie." And the house of cards would come tumbling down.
Last edited by Angie on Mon Jul 21, 2014 1:33 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Geoff
Site Admin
Posts: 872
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 7:24 am
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Contact:

Re: some things to consider

Postby Geoff » Mon Jul 21, 2014 1:06 am

:P

Angie wrote: What if Jesus came to you and said, "There's no such thing as divine love. Love is love, period. Immortality is free and noone needs to earn it by praying.".


I ABSOLUTELY know that Divine Love exists, is real and I can feel it. I have done so almost daily for 15 years. I am not alone in this experience. Sorry you cant tell someone who has experienced Divine Love that it does not exist. You just cant. And I also know that it does result in changes within me. I am not the person I was 15 years ago, nor even the person I was 3 years ago, and that statement you will find repeated by Divine Love followers across the globe. If my certainty upsets you, thats just too bad. Its not from arrogance. Its from knowing. I even had a 24 hour enlightenment experience last year, and THAT was knowing.

This is a very boring conversation at this point. Essentially your point is you don't believe in Divine Love. Fine. Go in peace. I cant convince you otherwise, nor is it my responsibility. You are in charge of who you want to be.

Funny that you dismiss the 11:11 site, and your edited response reads as follows:

Last edited by Angie on Mon Jul 21, 2014 11:11 am, edited 1 time in total. and later
Last edited by Angie on Mon Jul 21, 2014 11:33 am, edited 2 times in total.

hugs
Geoff
Love commands the universe. Man only resorts to control when love is missing.


Return to “Questions and Answers”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests