09-05-2011, 08:39 PM
(09-05-2011, 07:50 PM)Icaro Wrote: Moses, nuclear weapons, Atlantis, Tesla weapons, and UFO gov't technology...all those things were asked by Don in an attempt at genuine understanding of spiritual information. Because Don's intentions were innocent, the channel was preserved as much as possible. His seeking was genuine. Those are all ambiguous topics, not dates, so Ra is able to work with it as best as possible. The other dates that were mentioned didn't detune the channel as much because they don't involve armageddon end-time dates..they are historical. So these things don't allow the window phenomenon to erode as much.
You have to realize that an armageddon date is a specific pointed opportunity for the Orion entity to come through as much as possible because it involves fear, death, living for the future etc. And this was only because the session became detuned enough.
you yourself have to realize that harvest is not related to any kind of 'armageddon', which has been something Ra has made clear from the start. 'we are not interested in conditions that bring about the harvest'. this is the armageddon, or 'earth changes' you speak about which could potentially cause the armageddon you speak of.
ra, has no point stated or said that harvest was transient, or they were not interested in harvest itself, including its date.
it is appalling that someone is able to come up, and negate the importance of harvest, despite a good percentage of the book that was created through this channeling rests on that very harvest. but anything is possible when one needs to selectively deny things.
so you say moses, nuclear weapons, atlantis, tesla weapons, and ufo govt technology, were asked in relation to spiritual information .....
but, the harvest date OR period, which is something that was told to be directly tied to a mechanic created by infinite intelligence, is not. is it ?
you have just said that ufo govt technology was related to spiritual information. and you go on to make vague statements about 'the channel being preserved as much as possible'.
elaborate on this. how is government technology had by some random negatively inclined people are related to spiritual information, and something that is related to a cosmic mechanic, is not.
and before you attempt to wander off, no - harvest timing was explicitly told to be related to a cosmic mechanic. of course, its possible for anyone to claim 'negative entities made the channel say that', and dodge it - no actually its not possible. such an on-demand and selective application of such a grand statement would just be denial.
not only that, but apparently you also instantly and precisely measured don's intentions, and assessed how innocent and pure they were while asking all those information, when queried - just now :
- hey but it doesnt work on these many other stuff ?
- don's intentions were just clear enough.
- i see ...
so, don's intentions were pure 'enough' in order to not cause compromise of the channel in ALL those respects, but, they suddenly became 'impure' enough when he asked about the date of harvest, which is something that the entire business on the face of this planet, is actually for. so don instantly become self-indulged and self-serving just at that point.
Quote:Because the channel was detuned, 'Ra' lacked the clarity in responding to the question properly. If the session had not become detuned, Ra would have corrected Don and clarified. While Don was genuine in asking about a date, the concept of the harvest must not have been clear to him yet. The Orion entity was able to take advantage of this, again, because of what the date invokes.
In a perfectly aligned session, were Don to have brought that up, Ra would have been able to correct him because the channel was preserved for that session.
let us put it in plain street speak :
the channel was detuned 'enough' because you have need to selectively ignore that quote. it was not detuned in ANY of the endless unimportant information that you need not.
.................
you have gone outside the bounds of reason. from this point on, there is no possibility of talking this based on rationale with you. you are claiming negative interference whenever you see fit, and denying it whenever you see fit.
this finalizes my perception of you moving out of a personal preference about this subject so deeply rooted in you. at last, you have gone to the point of claiming negative influence in order to deny a quote - also applying your standards selectively.
the problem here is with your hypocrisy and selective application of your grand claim. i will cease replying to you in this discussion unless you start applying your standards and proposed theory of negative interference indiscriminately to any material as it should have been.