Messages

16

Introductions / Re: Jean-François's introduction

« on: March 09, 2016, 11:20:17 PM »

[/quote]

Well, I am 99.99% sure I am married to my ET, although I have never had that channeled. It's just...obvious. And he is most definitely a Priest. Now, from an exercise that I did with Ted Fontaine over 15 years ago, as I understand it, I am Server cast in the Artisan Entity. I don't know if that makes sense - it's been a long time since I delved into this aspect of things!

AND, as I go through a kind of extended period of therapy and sloughing off baggage and imprinting, I sometimes wonder if I am actually a Server in Power Mode. I know I definitely have the authority of a King (though I have no wish to be anyone's authority or tell anyone what to do, I'm more of a cheerleader/insight pointer-outer), and am deeply gratified by service, so, I think maybe Server in Power mode could also fit that scenario.
[/quote]

Are you an old soul? I don't recall. Old soul kings can be incredibly magnanimous and service oriented.

Why not have Shepherd do your chart? All the channels have their individual strengths, of course, but I've found his charts to be very reliable. And you'd get other details fleshed out that were missing from earlier channeling. For one, you don't look ordinal to me. I could be wrong but there's too much energy and solidity in your gaze. Looks cardinal.

Best,
Dave

17

Introductions / Re: Jean-François's introduction

« on: March 09, 2016, 01:26:20 AM »

Hi Jean-François -

Nice to meet you! I'm a 6th level old King who is also an "80% Catholic", and I also believe in reincarnation and not in Hell I like to say that the Michael Teachings are the "operating system" that I run my "Catholic" program on, if that makes any sense to you at all. It will be interesting to see how you feel about your overleaves as time goes on and you continue to study the teachings. I know that I was guessed to be a Warrior and a Server by various people before I was accurately pegged as a King (although truthfully I feel more like a Server these days), so, the first guesses aren't always where you end up. Loo.king forward to sharing more with you here.

Take care,
Chiara

Chiara,

Did you ever learn if your ET is incarnate or discarnate? The bleed through always interests me. If your ET is incarnate, for instance, you should show more server bleed through. In other words, you'd look like a King/Server. In that case, some people might mistake you for a server.

What about you, Jean-Francois? There's a board here if you'd like to post your Michael chart.

Best,
Dave 

18

Introductions / Re: Jean-François's introduction

« on: March 08, 2016, 09:28:16 PM »

Welcome Jean-Francois!

It's good to have you on the forum. I hope you find a variety of topics here to hold your interest.

Give your new chart some time to set in. Validation can take a fair amount of soul searching, so you may be pondering your newly discovered Kingness (and various overleaves) for several months to come. It's an enlightening journey.

Best,
Dave   

19

Suggestions/Help / Re: Anyone home?

« on: March 08, 2016, 09:20:57 PM »

I could see that if all the boards are topical, it doesn't leave room for anyone to post something that doesn't fit into a particular board. One solution is to have a general topic board. One could argue if there should be a general board for each topic, or just one central board. I could cut everything down to just a couple boards, but that might lead to ungainly strings of unorganized topics on a particular board. That's never appealed to me as much.

Dave 

20

Suggestions/Help / Re: Anyone home?

« on: March 08, 2016, 09:52:41 AM »

Hey Michael,

One of the great things about the MT is that it has something for everyone. Some people, as you say, are chiefly interested in soul age and the greater cosmology, while others use the material as a form of therapy. And they probably have their reasons for doing that. Either way, I hope you can find something of interest.

After I complete the site overhaul I'll be spending more time on this forum -- mostly deciding what to do with it. The MT tends to be splintered into many smaller groups now, so it's a challenge to attract large numbers anymore. I'm open to suggestions as to how this forum might be shaped in the future. I do intend to promote the main site more heavily in the future, so I suspect we'll eventually see some traffic. Till then, pop in now and then.

Best,
Dave

21

Suggestions/Help / Re: Anyone home?

« on: March 06, 2016, 03:34:35 AM »

Good to see you, John!

As you know, I've been off in the Twilight Zone for the past couple years.

Do people ever attend the chat? I was debating if I should keep it when I do the new site upgrade.

And I'd love to see something about Michael history.

Best,
Dave

22

Suggestions/Help / Re: Board organization

« on: February 29, 2016, 11:02:32 PM »

I extended the time-span for editing posts.

Regarding organization, I simply added topics based around popular MT areas of discussions. It was mostly to prompt ideas for people regarding topics they could bring up.

And providing there are new posts, you can see any new posts clearly marked when you sign-in. Of course, the forum is uninhabited at the moment, so the feature is somewhat moot at the moment.

23

Suggestions/Help / Re: Anyone home?

« on: February 29, 2016, 10:57:57 PM »

I mostly abandoned the forum when my elderly parents took ill and required additional care. I'll probably do more with this forum after I upgrade the entire MT site in the near future.

Best,
Dave

24

Essence / Re: Essence or Soul or Higher Self

« on: January 27, 2012, 12:35:56 AM »

All of those terms could be used interchangeably if you don't want to get too technical. I sort of like the term soul used to denote a single incarnation and rely on the term essence to represent the collective self, or repository that contains all previous incarnations, including the kitchen sink, I suspect. But I don't think it matters that much.

And you could make a similar argument with the term, fragment. I've heard it used to represent both essence and the individual incarnation. Essence is indeed a fragment of the Tao and the soul in our body is a fragment of essence. It's all the same source energy, though, so how you choose to assign these terms is a matter of personal preference.

Best,
Dave

That viewpoint impedes communication. There's a reason why technical terminology (jargon if you will) doesn't always mean what the same word means in the wider culture. That's also the reason why some people get really bent out of shape when the mass media appropriates a term that has a well-understood meaning and perverts it to another meaning. For example, take "hacker." It originally meant someone who sits at a keyboard and hacks at a program he's writing. The media perverted it to mean someone who breaks into someone else's computer.

I was just tossing out some different ways of looking at these terms, John. ;-)

Dave

25

General Discussion / Re: How do you go about telling people about the Michael teachings?

« on: January 27, 2012, 12:29:01 AM »

I've pasted the channeling I did on here about the flower of life. Once I knew it took seven circles to complete the entire flower and the pedals all looked their on 3 axises, I figured there is an overall dynamic to the universe that we as a human specie haven't fully understood. I channeled the entity when i primped and primed for it, and got good paragraph or so, disclosing that i wasn't incorrect to assume the pedals makes the axises and the flower is the very dynamic of their teaching. The teachings themselves were meant for not just agape but used to help with all exigencies of life, the flower just being a symbol of the hidden matrix of our cosmos; Inspiration, expression, action and assimilation. Which then they built a template for us to use as a way towards understanding ourselves and the larger picture, since that's what humanity needs most.

The ultimate goal of the teachings is agape. I don't think there's much argument there. And understanding ourselves and seeing the bigger picture is certainly a concept that's written throughout the books and scattered all across the MT site. This is nothing new, of course. 

It only remains theoretical because well, we have yet to prove it perfect certainty and use it to its fullest potential. That's why we all made agreements with the Michael teachings. To use them, share them, validate them, so as a collective we can slowly fade away the maya on our planet and see what is and whats not. Perhaps right now I'm only on the sharing stage, and starting towards the validation stage. Just recently I got into a conversation about the seven different roles with a couple of folks, and all them right away were curious to  know what they were. After briefly going over all of the roles and the principle behind each one, they all right away knew which one they were. I remember going over what an artisan with king casting would act like, and with out a doubt the guy burst out laughing and says "YOU'VE NAILED IT! THATS SO ME!" Thats exactly what i pegged him as from the get go. He was happy, I was happy. Much love to go around.

I'd guess that most of us have had experiences like that when we shared the MT. I think it's always easier to spark interest than retain it, however. One obvious hitch is that once students get beyond the theoretical side of the MT they inevitably face the task of doing the inner work necessary to live the teachings. That's daunting for some, and they will either fall back to the theoretical or quit studying the material altogether.

Dave

26

Spirituality / Re: Decording?

« on: January 23, 2012, 02:23:38 AM »

To Dave & All ,

Terri C. Benning posted something very insightful on another board, which has a group for discussing "Conscious Essence Contact," explaining:

This is somewhat similar in concept to a chapter in Shepherd Hoodwin's book "The Levels of Self", but Terri's terminology is more complicated and unnecessarily dense, in my opinion. These concepts need to be simplified. Once again, I think the Briggs excerpt just makes things worse.

27

General Discussion / Re: How do you go about telling people about the Michael teachings?

« on: January 23, 2012, 01:07:06 AM »

I've seen a lot of the ways michael teachings as been packaged, I know and we all know the name is arbitrary, but people without agreements do not unless it's stated right away. The whole metaphysical law of 7 i feel could use a little more clarification to the public. Take a look at the flower of life, and see that its literally the very dynamic of the teaching. One of the most circulated ancient symbols is conveying the "truth" that the michael entity perceives all the same. So it's not just about the michael teachings, its about the information that supports what we already know and how it all comes to together.

The mathematical side of the MT is certainly interesting from a structural point of view, but there's been a longtime tendency to over emphasize the theoretical aspects of the teachings while ignoring the more important issue of application. The true dynamic of the teachings is always about people, a truth frequently forgotten when theoretical concerns become the primary focus. So even if the flower of life has relevance to the teachings -- which I tend to doubt -- it's importance is peripheral to the core of the teachings, which is about learning tolerance for others and practicing unconditional love.

Personally I'm still going to continue with trying to disperse the information when appropriate, and I'm still going to share it when everyone i think would be interested. I've already met several people that loved it, and several that thought it didn't exist. What ever. What as already been done, as been done, what hasn't will be whats next in the next wave of publications. More of the teachings is evolving and more information is being provided to give better clarity of how it all "goes down". I'm a communicator to the nth degree, and I will further try to better communicate all that as been provided.

New information is always subject to validation. Sometimes what I've seen labeled as an evolution of the material is really just a distortion. The core material, however, is widely available now and ready to be implemented if students are willing to do the necessary work.

Best,
Dave

28

General Discussion / Re: How do you go about telling people about the Michael teachings?

« on: January 22, 2012, 03:33:29 AM »

Its not so much evangelizing the teachings as a whole, but producing the information to the masses, so they can benefit the value of learning more about the universe they live in. Its all about finding the common demoninator amongst all "spiritual" teachings, and finding more core truths out. You know we have scientists furthering the evolvement of knowledge and truth by examining the concrete reality around us, michael teachings is merely information categorized into a template that furthers evolvement of our reality of more abstract concepts.

What I'm all about is trying to getting valuable slightly more esoteric knowledge for the masses to indulge in. I don't mean sermonizing the teachings as a religious opportunity towards enlightenment, but merely having the basic core of the teachings presented into simple methods of understanding.

This is already being done, of course, with the books, websites, and channels.

Honestly my biggest peeve about the teachings is it's name. I hate using the name Michael, because it almost acts as a repellent as getting those whom don't have agreements with the Michael engaged with the information provided, so they themselves can have stepping stones to jump forward on so to speak when is comes down to thinking about the larger picture and whom they actually are, and why we're here all here. It's like it glamorizes the messenger more then the message with the name Michael before the teaching.

I don't think Michael students are that superficial. The name Michael was arbitrary to begin with, and its primary use is to denote the source of the material and attract those students previously familiar with the teachings. There have been attempts to water-down the teachings and refit the terminology, but those efforts generally failed. I've even seen attempts to commercialize the teachings, but what most marketers forget is that the MT doesn't appeal to the ego, which is a major selling point in the self-help arena. If you recall, "The Secret," like many law of attraction vehicles, promised the way to abundance, success, and personal power; the MT doesn't have that what's in it for me type of motivator. And to reach the masses, you typically need to stroke the ego somehow.

Either way, much of the masses would never embrace the teachings due to different perspectives in soul age. We had one channel change the name of the source and try to blend the material with other new age concepts, and the results were idiotic and embarrassing. Enough of that, please.

Best,
Dave

29

Essence / Re: Essence or Soul or Higher Self

« on: January 22, 2012, 03:07:13 AM »

All of those terms could be used interchangeably if you don't want to get too technical. I sort of like the term soul used to denote a single incarnation and rely on the term essence to represent the collective self, or repository that contains all previous incarnations, including the kitchen sink, I suspect. But I don't think it matters that much.

And you could make a similar argument with the term, fragment. I've heard it used to represent both essence and the individual incarnation. Essence is indeed a fragment of the Tao and the soul in our body is a fragment of essence. It's all the same source energy, though, so how you choose to assign these terms is a matter of personal preference.

Best,
Dave

30

Spirituality / Re: Decording?

« on: January 16, 2012, 08:32:42 AM »

-----

Luckily, we have learned a few things from the Michael Teachings that will help us on our path. Here are a few excerpts from the Briggs transcripts (1982):

"All you need to know is you are your Overleaves.  You can be them actively or not.  But by not being them doesn’t mean they go away."

"No matter what another person’s Overleaves, we have to relate to them out of our own. So if a person is in Rejection, we need not worry about “saying” or “doing” something that may “cause” (make) them to feel rejected.  They will experience their Overleaves no matter how you/we act.  You truly do not have the power to “trigger” anyone’s reaction or action to anything."

I agree with this on principle, but it's a good example of where the channeled transcript should have been edited by the channel and reworded for clarity. This reads like a rough draft. For instance, while it may be true that we are ultimately responsible for our reactions to others, we are never 100% infallible to emotional upset, and even the best of us can occasionally get our buttons pushed. Therefore it's important to respect the sensitivity of others and show compassion when needed for any sore spots that may trigger negative reactions. People can indeed be coerced into emotional upset. It is quite possible to push someone till they break, which in certain cases may lead to mind-f*ck. 

“WHAT” is up to Essence.  When you’re not involved in an Essence “what”, you as a Personality get to play in a playground where thought turns into [a] physical object.  Whether you are enlightened or not, whether you live totally in balance or not, you will still create from thought, when you are not involved in an Essence “What.”  That’s the struggle.  “How do I know the difference between the B.S. I’m creating and the “What” Essence has chosen for me?”  You won’t.  It’s not your job to know the difference.  It’s up to Essence to know the difference, not you.  You don’t have to learn anything.  You didn’t reincarnate, Essence did."

This apparent division between essence and personality is an ongoing argument. Personally, I disagree with this channel. We are, in fact, a form of essence. If we were not, the concept of karma, for example, would completely fall apart. Essence would be like a master puppeteer that dangled us down to experience untold cruelties for no reason at all. Such a life would be unbelievably unfair. If the lessons of life are going to matter, essence would need to be there to experience them first hand. I think there's no question that we are a part of essence or, as a channel once said, our personality is an extension of essence. It's really just a matter of perception.

For the sake of theory, pretend that you are essence right now and your childhood was a recent incarnation. As you matured into adulthood you became more aware of the world around you and your perception of life greatly expanded. But the young child that was once you is still apart of you, is she not? She just became part of the greater expansion of yourself. And that's how I think essence works with the personality. When we die and rejoin our collective self, it's more like a reawakening to the totality of who we are, as opposed to a master and slave relationship or a Borg-like absorption, which I think is a major distortion of the concept.

Part of the game, of course, is to enter our lifetime in a state of amnesia. We then spend the rest of our life trying to remember who we truly are. The Michael teachings help us remember how we set up our life, and if we stay in our positive poles and work to eliminate the grip of chief features, our core self (or essence) will indeed manifest.

Best,
Dave