DarkoMarco
01-10-2011, 02:53 PM
That's very interesting DM.
There is a difference IMHO between "soul groups" and "soul mates" in the most conventional "definitions" of such.
Soul groups are allegedly souls that you travel with repeatedly within and without incarnations, in different roles to both help the spiritual growth of the soul, both as students and teachers. Often times, the roles and lessons, in a broad sense are agreed upon before the individual incarnation.
Soul Mates on the other hand...well this is easier...
Soul Mates and Twin Flames (http://imaginativeworlds.com/forum/showthread.php?2049-Soul-Mates-and-Twin-Flames)
I haven't read the Michael teachings in entirety yet, however it seems that they are using the term to describe something else...JMHO of course.
Many channelers claiming varied teachings/hypothesis. I'm sure there may be some truth within them all, and then again perhaps not ....there's Cayce, Jane Roberts, Esther Hicks, Neale Donald Walsh, Madame Blavatsky etc.....along with Yarbro.
Guess the question may be, why are they all getting different information? :dunno:
Hey,,,,I feel you about channelling,,,,I know I might come across like a true believer with this Michael stuff,,,,but,,,,I have read book cases of spirit/occult related stuff in my time,,,,never,,,,,never have I ran across something that failed to set my BS meter off like the Michael Teachings,,,,so much usefull information and so easy to understand,,,,,so,,,,,,if I'm a tad bit pushy about it, I apoligise,,,,I enjoyed them so much and feel so lucky to have stumbled across them,,,,I just want others to have that chance.
But as far as some of the best channelers having discrepencies,,,I don't know. Cayce would have given us much better stuff if some one was there to ask the right questions. Hell,,,,Cayce got shut up a lot of times cause people couldn't handle the info. Jane Roberts IMHO doesn't disagree with the michael teachings at all,,,,,but I'll be honest,,,,,,,Jane Roberts Seth material is very high level stuff,,,,,,,,,,in some cases superior to the Michael teachings,,,but,,,,,,they intail significant IQ in the reader for proper absorption.
And Cayce and Blavatsky agreed like crazy.
But,,,,I gotta tell you,,,have you ever picked up Blavatsky's Isis unvielled? A huge two volume set, each volume close to a thousand pages. The same goes for The secret Doctrine,,I've read both of the two volume sets,,,,,,both extremely good. But,,,,with a lot less reading and I lot less pain,,,,I got way more out of the Michael Teachings.
Oh,,and one little bitty teensy thing,,,,Yarbro didn't channel Michael,,,,a group of folks that wished to keep thier annanimity did. Yarbro was thier chosen writer to compile there notes.
Jane Roberts Seth Material may be the absolute best material out there. It is absolutely the highest level stuff. I've read "the seth material" and,,,it is very difficult to read through and absorb. You have to digest small portions. Maybe a higher IQ could tackle it without the small doses thing.
A Sadhu IQ if you will,,,,I could get it,,,but with a bit of work involved on my part.
The Michael Teachings are far simpler,,,,,much much easier to grasp and apply IMHO.
On another note,,,,I pm'd Sadhu about two weeks ago,,,,I suggested he come back,,,I told him IW misses him,,and it was just a silly little spat. No sarcasm or nothing,,I swear I was genuine.
There is a difference IMHO between "soul groups" and "soul mates" in the most conventional "definitions" of such.
Soul groups are allegedly souls that you travel with repeatedly within and without incarnations, in different roles to both help the spiritual growth of the soul, both as students and teachers. Often times, the roles and lessons, in a broad sense are agreed upon before the individual incarnation.
Soul Mates on the other hand...well this is easier...
Soul Mates and Twin Flames (http://imaginativeworlds.com/forum/showthread.php?2049-Soul-Mates-and-Twin-Flames)
I haven't read the Michael teachings in entirety yet, however it seems that they are using the term to describe something else...JMHO of course.
Many channelers claiming varied teachings/hypothesis. I'm sure there may be some truth within them all, and then again perhaps not ....there's Cayce, Jane Roberts, Esther Hicks, Neale Donald Walsh, Madame Blavatsky etc.....along with Yarbro.
Guess the question may be, why are they all getting different information? :dunno:
Hey,,,,I feel you about channelling,,,,I know I might come across like a true believer with this Michael stuff,,,,but,,,,I have read book cases of spirit/occult related stuff in my time,,,,never,,,,,never have I ran across something that failed to set my BS meter off like the Michael Teachings,,,,so much usefull information and so easy to understand,,,,,so,,,,,,if I'm a tad bit pushy about it, I apoligise,,,,I enjoyed them so much and feel so lucky to have stumbled across them,,,,I just want others to have that chance.
But as far as some of the best channelers having discrepencies,,,I don't know. Cayce would have given us much better stuff if some one was there to ask the right questions. Hell,,,,Cayce got shut up a lot of times cause people couldn't handle the info. Jane Roberts IMHO doesn't disagree with the michael teachings at all,,,,,but I'll be honest,,,,,,,Jane Roberts Seth material is very high level stuff,,,,,,,,,,in some cases superior to the Michael teachings,,,but,,,,,,they intail significant IQ in the reader for proper absorption.
And Cayce and Blavatsky agreed like crazy.
But,,,,I gotta tell you,,,have you ever picked up Blavatsky's Isis unvielled? A huge two volume set, each volume close to a thousand pages. The same goes for The secret Doctrine,,I've read both of the two volume sets,,,,,,both extremely good. But,,,,with a lot less reading and I lot less pain,,,,I got way more out of the Michael Teachings.
Oh,,and one little bitty teensy thing,,,,Yarbro didn't channel Michael,,,,a group of folks that wished to keep thier annanimity did. Yarbro was thier chosen writer to compile there notes.
Jane Roberts Seth Material may be the absolute best material out there. It is absolutely the highest level stuff. I've read "the seth material" and,,,it is very difficult to read through and absorb. You have to digest small portions. Maybe a higher IQ could tackle it without the small doses thing.
A Sadhu IQ if you will,,,,I could get it,,,but with a bit of work involved on my part.
The Michael Teachings are far simpler,,,,,much much easier to grasp and apply IMHO.
On another note,,,,I pm'd Sadhu about two weeks ago,,,,I suggested he come back,,,I told him IW misses him,,and it was just a silly little spat. No sarcasm or nothing,,I swear I was genuine.