PDA

View Full Version : Questions re: The Popular Model Conundrum



MikeI
8th August 2007, 03:57 AM
Re: The Popular Model Conundrum

This article caught my attention because I read a book which rocked my
spiritual viewpoint with similar conclusions. The book is "The Siren Call
of Hungry Ghosts" by Joe Fisher.

Have you read this book, and if so, do you have any opinions on it? If not,
it answers a lot of the questions in your article.

Intending to prove the New Age worldview, Fisher visited many channelers
of "high-level" spirits, quizzed the spirit guides as to their incarnate
life histories, took detailed notes, and then travelled the world to check
out the guides' biographies.

Every single biography failed to check out. The names did not exist. Some
of the historical data was valid, but there were always glaring errors.
When Fisher confronted the guides, the spirits either became evasive,
counterattacked, or broke contact, just as in your article.

Fisher suffered personal problems during his research. He was lured into
falling disastrously in love with his main spirit guide, had his energy
drained under the pretense of performing healings, and became depressed.
After his book was published, he committed suicide.

Fisher came to a radical conclusion: good spirits do not channel through
mediums. They are either forbidden to, or are on the wrong wavelength.
Everything that channels, he believed, is earthbound or worse. Much of the
New Age is a deliberate inversion of the truth intended to maximize our
vulnerability to these parasites.

This also implied to him that the channeled "gods" of antiquity were the
same class of beings - thus the worldwide practice of blood sacrifice and
holy warfare. If he is right, humanity has a discovery to make on par with
the germ theory of disease, and a similar step forward in human well-being.

Fisher was not a Fundamentalist and did not become one. He reached these
conclusions independently starting from a New Age viewpoint.

Kardek, fortunately for posterity, asked a lot of questions about physics
and cosmology. His sources can be put to the test by looking for scientific
knowledge gained since his time, and counting truths and falsehoods.

I had a look and found several misses and no hits. For example:
(Spirits' Book)

47. Was the human species among the organic elements contained in the
terrestrial globe?

"Yes; and it made its appearance at the time appointed by the Creator.
Hence the statement that man was 'formed out of the dust of the ground.'"

[ no mention of evolution or our genetic similarity to apes ]

53. Did the human race come into existence on various points of the globe?

"Yes, and at various epochs; and this is one of the causes of the diversity
of human races. The people of the primitive periods, being dispersed abroad
in different climates, and forming alliances with those of other countries
than their own, gave rise perpetually to new types of humanity."

[ We know better from genetic evidence. This is a big miss on the spirits' part. ]

5. Are all the globes that revolve in space inhabited?

"Yes; and the people of the earth are far from being, as you suppose,
the first in intelligence, goodness, and general development.

[ Not in this solar system. ]

That's enough to show Kardec's sources were a bunch of liars just like
Joe Fisher's.

Have you looked into channeling further since the article was written?
I am fascinated with the subject and would love to see an update. I also
own Astral Dynamics and am practicing the techniques.

Thanks,
Mike

Robert Bruce
30th July 2008, 11:09 AM
G'day,

A most refreshing post....thank you very much for sharing this.

Not the most popular subject in the newage world.....:)

My ongoing research into this area shows that there are 'some' genuine higher level spirit beings and guides that communicate with humans, but these are few and far between.

The only reason I have been able to ascertain this, is my advanced knowledge of spiritual and metaphysical matters. This in particular involves things that are generally unknown to the public, but provable and repeatable: concerning the human energy body, the nature of reality, and the nature of Source/God, spiritual beings and spirit entities, etc.

The acid test for any spirit communication is where you ask the hard questions. If the spirit avoids hard questions or is offended, or anything outside of a genuine open discussion, then it immediately becomes apparent that something is wrong.

But on the other hand, angels and advanced spirit beings do exist. I have had many genuine encounters with advanced beings, but as I said in the article, these beings will not sit around chatting about trivial earthly matters on a daily basis.

Higher beings, however, will tend to give cryptic hints and nudges, rather than instructions. However, occasionally you will get a lengthy dialog from one. The truth and level of such things is always apparent. Higher beings will rarely allow discussion, and in truth no discussion is generally needed.

Higher beings are careful not to interfere with the choices we humans have, careful not to overly influence us. They usually give hints, and occasionally warnings, for us to heed or not.

There is something called the Middle Plateau, well known in the Catholic faith, re a discussion I heard between Art Bell and Father Malachi Martin, on Coast to Coast AM, years ago. This is a spiritual level superimposed over the earth that is full of deceiving spirits and astral wildlife and lower beings. This is the area where most channelled spirits hail from. One must move beyond this in order to get into the higher spheres, into the levels where angels and higher beings exist. As far as I can ascertain, this is a fairly balanced view of spiritual planes and how they are set up.

The acid test, again, is where hard repeatable personal experience is put to channeled spirits for discussion. If anything outside of genuine open minded discussion ensues, then red flags arise. Also, there are some spirits that do not have knowledge but are honest, and these will simply say 'I do not know', which is perfectly acceptable.

Take care, Robert