Switch to full style
Let us know what you think.
Post a reply

The Difference between Channelling & Being Spontaneous

Mon May 04, 2015 8:05 am +0000

When we are in the freedom of self-expression, part of the culture of self-gratification, then there is a spontaneity that allows new Ideas to be expressed by the individual, even without that individual's prior knowledge, planning, or expectation.

This could only occur when the individual has engaged in the harmony of the adjutant spirits, as thoughts are ignited through the "flame of the tongue". How could we know what new ideas are until we express them? And are we receiving some certain Ideas from the Infinite Mind, through the ministry of SEraphim or otherwise, when each of we is authentically representing his own culture?

The line between Man and God, divine and human, blurring into one Understanding/Expression is an issue that causes intellectual distaste in the forum circles. The lasting dream is that when a person, that soul, has fused truly within the auspices of the Inner-Guiding Thought Adjuster, there is no more ability to give distinction between God and "that one". The goal of progress is that the children of this world and the world to come will be wholly divine.

What is the issue, is that God does not have a name, although each of us has been given a name. It is said that Thought Adjuster's "SERIAL NUMBER" becomes "worn away completely" when the Atjuster no longer consigns to report to "the Bosom of the Father". Do our own "Birth-Names" wear away, too?

The issue, forged in "Testimonial", "Autobiographical Content", or otherwise the non-Represenational (non-Agency) genre of Literature, means that an individual is giving content on none other than himself. Whether this content indicates the mundane or the divine becomes irrelevent. One may act, for instance "on MichaEL" or the father's behalf, but that is in agency, a striving to show the views of another. When the mature individual acts in authentic expression/Understanding, he is allowing "the will of God", the choice of the Adjuster, to predominate his action. Whatever character or personality is shown is an act of the universe, this cannot be defined to a name or bound to a number and therefore the individual, in name, cannot claim ownership of the act in the hereafter.

We often see attempts to claim ownership of purveyed literature, in the form of "I AM STEPHEN" or in the signature. This is something that can be contractual, implying an attribution to the NAAM, for instance the name "I AM" the name "STEPHEN", or otherwise. This is not bound to the soul who is speaking but to an identity that stems from the mental identity of each name, and these are given unto the Third Person and Source-Center the Infinite Spirit rather than the Universal Father. This is not bound the the expressor, such as in the selective Remembrance of His Adjuster, but is considered as Represenational.

Authentic Testimony that is believed both by God and Man is a cornerstone of Progress in the Grand Universe and for the Maturation of the Supreme Being.

I accept responsibility personally for the things that I have published on the internet or otherwise publickly unto mankind.

to the underlaying unity of all life
so that the voice of intuition may guide us
closer to our common keeper
Post a reply