Yeah, I think the assertion here is that "light" and "dark," "good" and "evil" are just names that we come up with based on our own values. "Evil" is anyone who wants to harm me or thinks that I am evil, right?
The interesting possibility this opens up is that in the cosmological view of things, "service to self" and "service to others" are equally valid approaches, with radically different outcomes. "God" would seem to recommend one approach, but never to interfere with the agency of either to grow and act.
Makes you think about what your choices really mean. Is choosing to do "good" out of fear really choosing "service to others?" Or is it mistakenly choosing the fear/domination ethos? Does it really matter if your facts are "correct" if they don't lead to the outcome you desire?
Channeling is difficult this way because you can't remove ego from the connection, and you have no objective way to determine the source. In other words, you can only trust your Self. That means the ancient traditions of Self-realization are critical to develop discernment. Everything true that we learn -- regardless of the source -- is good learning, so long as we can discern the falsehood. I think channeling is just a signpost that reminds us that there is a deeper source of knowing inside us; the only source we can fully trust. And we should not rely on channeled books, however old or new, or the words of any other. Including this guy, and including myself.
|