CocteauBoy, if this info from post #14:
is still accurate, then there still exists a wall of bullshit that no amount of explanation on your part can scale.
You were good up to this point 
LOL, well, I’m not trying to sell anything. Just sharing more accurate information in a thread full of reactionary, uninformed, and prejudiced opinions. It’s okay if you still feel that way about it, but it’s probably not necessary to be so hostile.
One thing that is great about studying such a teaching is that it encourages us not to shut out entire groups of people just because we don’t think, feel, or see things the same way. There are truths everywhere, not just in one form, place, teaching, person, or group.
Anyway, I didn’t mean to provoke so much hostility and insult, though I do appreciate the range of colorful opinions.
That’s all…
Well, sure. There have to be consumers of bullshit too, otherwise there’s no demand.
I totally understand. You revived a thread from a year and a half ago to “share” with us, and since “sharing” consists of you presenting your side of the argument only, you will now kindly excuse our rudeness in questioning the extremely unscientific aspects of your belief and be off, leaving us swine to wallow amongst your pearls of wisdom.
BTW, if you do decide to participate in this conversation, could you please bring us your best example of a channeling for us to examine? I’d like to see how different it is from all the fraudulent ones out there.
Oh, I wasn’t presenting this as scientific. Personal spirituality, psychology, and philosophy are never about empirical sciences, but about the search for understanding. I see these arts as something like map makers, not scientists. There are all kinds of maps that can be used to navigate the same territories, and none of them can be said to be better or worse than another, just different in function and focus. I love using Grub Hub to navigate New York City’s menus, but use a subway map to navigate from one location to another, and a map of museums for days of exploration, etc. There’s nothing scientific or unscientific about any of these maps, except that they are interpretations of a terrain shared by many with very different paths. That’s what teachings in philosophy, spirituality, and psychology offer, too. I just don’t think it’s particularly helpful to disparage someone else’s map to help secure my own.
Goddammit, don’t be an overquoter, too.
Those maps are all based on one single reality.
Not even if it’s a map to The Big Rock Candy Mountain?
When you can take the pebble from my hand, it will be time for you to leave.
I appreciate the invitation, but I’m not here to prove anything or to invite more hostility. I just wanted to offer a different general perspective from the dominant one in this thread. Besides, a “best example” is so relative, so I wouldn’t even know where to begin.
By the way, I am with all of you on the disgust with fraudulence and repulsive representations that prevail in such an open field, but I’ve had to come to terms with the fact that any art is going to be full of more bullshit that provokes disgust than it does provoke a sense of resonance and truth. This is true of music, painting, sculpture, and everything else. Spirituality, psychology, and philosophies are arts, so we are going to get those who hijack these things in ways that are disgusting, at best. Shoot, this is even true of the most scientific pursuits. But even among the most legitimate representations in any of these fields, there will only be a few that truly resonate with us as individuals. I think that’s because we are just so unique, and there is no way that any teaching, spirituality, religion, psychology, or philosophy, or even any one music, can accommodate all of us. I’ve grown to appreciate differences more than ever because of this realization, instead of insulating myself against them because they can’t prove to me their validity, when this is such a relative standard.
A lot of empty words wrapped around the reality that you cannot back up your claim that, while most other channeling is fraudulent, yours is the Real Deal.
Metaphorically speaking, I’d say they are different realities of the same terrain, but not the same reality. The concept of “reality” is such a fascinating one, though.
So is the concept of unicorns. So what?
Not different realities. Different subsets of available information.
Back to the “Michael Teachings”-do you have any channelings you’d like to present as real, as opposed to the other fraudulent ones? If not, could you give us some good reasons to accept yours over all those others?
Oh, good lord, I didn’t and don’t claim mine is the “real deal.” I wouldn’t impose that on anyone. I don’t really even know by what standard someone could claim that for someone else. That’s like saying “my music is more real than yours” or that “my love is more real than yours.” It’s not easy to define the validity and legitimacy of something like this, but we can tend to see when these things are fraudulent, manipulative, and harmful. Even then, that can be subjective, I suppose. I can only claim that my work is intended to represent an authentic and honest means for some of us to understand ourselves and our lives. At my site, I question the validity of channeling as it is generally claimed to be understood. I am very open about my own sense that the concept of “channeling” might be a very misunderstood method of creativity and expression, or a means to access parts of the brain that we might tend to block for various reasons, or even that it might be a twisted psychological trick for overcoming blocks to personal expression. I can only share that my experiences consistently exemplify for me that there is something valid to the concept of channeling in that something is happening that goes beyond current explanations for how we normally access information. Not necessarily in explaining the general information as a teaching, but in the personal relevance that comes during a private session. But, really, even that could be chalked up to good guesses by some, I suppose. Beyond the concept of channeling, the information is really what matters. Is it helpful and useful? That’s not for me to say for someone else. And I have no defenses against anyone claiming that it isn’t.
For the luvva…You said there is a lot of fraudulent channeling out there. Now, either your channeling is fraudulent or it is not. If it is not, how are we to tell the difference?
The first line from your website reads
so don’t even try to brush it aside, as inconvenient a topic it is for you on a message board like this.