The problem I see with these videos
is that the Bible is a book of written
channelings in itself, right? How do you
know many of the messengers of the bible
wern't being taken for a ride by false
spirits claiming they were God as they
were writing it?

So where does that leave us?


I think Michael Christopher of
MichaelChrisBlog.blogspot.com says it best:


I tend to think of the world as a place filled with people who, despite some massive overlap in different regions, have different ideas and interpretations of reality. Since so much of what we "know" about reality cannot be confirmed, and since so much evidence is simply things that we take for granted as true, the ego adapts itself and it finds that evidence which correlates with our current secure understanding of reality.

I don't know if anyone can really transcend this. I mean, no one can be omniscient. Thus, people must come to conclusions based on their own biases and belief systems. It is the only way a conclusion can ever be reached short of witnessing an event. In the case of witnessing, we can only believe about the event that which we have been exposed to, and thus we must start to suppose things about what led to the event and what it's ramifications will be, which once more involves biased thing. It is really impossible to be entirely unbiased, although some people make far more honorable attempts than others.

Our minds create for us worldviews. In many cases, religion does, but the fact is that even religious people have their own distinct interpretations of what their particular documents say. This is individualized and based on our own biases and often our worldviews are minor emanations of our greater spirit. Actually, that's probably always the case.

It should be said that even the greatest researcher of ancient history has never set foot in ancient Sumeria or Rome or anything like that and that any research they do is subject to a great deal of legitimate scrutiny. Nothing can be proven about history if everyone involved in the event is dead. Not because nothing is true, but because evidence is only what it is - conclusions drawn by researchers. Conclusions about something which cannot be re-experienced may be, no matter how credible, still incorrect. So to say "I did my research!" does not mean you know the truth. It means you have created your personal truth out of the personal truths of other individuals.

So we come to places like the internet to find like-minded individuals and to come together, but often coming together becomes taking apart that which we disagree with, and which stands in our way of ultimate unification/security (something which can never and will never be achieved in a reality full of individuals). The slightest disagreement does not have to be hostile, but in effect it is a propaganda war since the two individuals in the debate only know what they know. It is also easy to say that people should become smarter, but if it were that easy then it wouldn't need to be said. Intelligence is limited by circumstance often times, and people don't like being made to feel dumb, so they react against people who seem to know things which scare them with fear and hostility. Or, variously, they find someone who basically agrees, and the two form a propaganda-partnership of sorts.

The internet is just a microcosm for the world at large. It is really like this everywhere (well... not like this haha, in terms of the discussion matter. Just like this in terms of how our minds operate and interact). The key to peace is to let go and to not even really believe your own propaganda, at least fully. It's good to have something solid to latch onto, but if this really is a fragment of our eternal lives that are filled with such unawareness and ignorance, it's a safe bet that even the most honorable and intelligent of all of us are dead wrong about quite a few things.