Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 162

Thread: What does the "Alt Community" collectively agree upon?

  1. #31
    Administrator Aragorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2015
    Location
    Middle-Earth
    Posts
    13,727
    Thanks
    60,980
    Thanked 56,944 Times in 13,717 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Dumpster Diver View Post
    Amanda: If you follow what David Wilcock has been saying, we are at an end of a 75000 year cycle. Everyone thusly goes one of three places:

    Door #1: a 4 Dimensional Earth for "da good guys"
    Door #2: another 3D planet for folks who are too bewildered to make a clear decision about being a good or bad guy
    Door #3: 3D death and transport to 4D "evil world" for the upper 5% of the evil guys

    [...]
    This is Law Of One stuff, otherwise also known as the Ra material, as channeled through Edgar Cayce — of whom Wilcock believes he would be the reincarnation — in the 1960s.

    Furthermore, that stuff was also already literally spoken about many years ago at the Above Top Secret forum, by someone who claimed to be an Illuminati insider who had been ordered to entertain questions from forum members for a very limited amount of time, in line with the alleged Illuminati tradition that they may do whatever they want on the condition that they disclose their intentions — albeit sufficiently cryptically, so that only the "awake & aware" would get it.

    The event which was to lead to this alleged three-way split of the collective of human souls on Earth — the good go to "4D", the bad go to "4D negative", and the lukewarm go to another "3D" world, whereby Earth would regress into an earlier state of its evolution as a recovery for all of the things humanity had done to her — was supposed to be 21 December 2012, when Marduk the Destroyer would be coming back. According to this character, Marduk the Destroyer was Lucifer, in the form of the alleged Planet X, also known as Nibiru.

    Said alleged Illuminati insider went by the name "Hidden Hand" over at the Above Top Secret forum, and it is by now generally accepted that the guy was just a prankster, reciting stuff from the Law Of One and other esoteric publications.

    So much for Wilcock's "research".
    = DEATH BEFORE DISHONOR =

  2. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Aragorn For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th May 2017), Amanda (31st May 2017), Dreamtimer (24th May 2017), Dumpster Diver (15th April 2018), Elen (24th May 2017), modwiz (24th May 2017), Onthebit (20th June 2017)

  3. #32
    Retired Member United States
    Join Date
    8th November 2015
    Posts
    1,264
    Thanks
    1,691
    Thanked 7,654 Times in 1,264 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Aragorn View Post
    This is Law Of One stuff, otherwise also known as the Ra material, as channeled through Edgar Cayce — of whom Wilcock believes he would be the reincarnation — in the 1960s.
    I don't recall that from the Edgar Cayce teachings? I recall something called "Cosmic Awareness" which I think is still "coming through" but by a different mouth piece and the Ra material. But whatever.... if it happens, we will know. meantime it catma that we need to be concerned about.

    A catma is a belief espoused by a relgion which must be understood by all members of that religion. Although it must be understood, it does not have to be accepted as truth because proof of the catma may not yet exist or be accepted, or that proof requires postulates that the adherant to the religion may not presently accept.http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=catma
    The central Discordian catma is: "All affirmations are true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true and false and meaningless in some sense."

    This is true in some sense. What matters, however, is not whether things are true in some sense, but how far fetched that sense is.

    DISCORDIAN CATMAS
    Think For Yourself.
    Convictions Cause Convicts.
    The Conclusion You Jump To May Be Your Own.
    The Pun is Mightier then the Sword.
    Truth: If its not one thing its another.
    Reality: It all depends on how you look at it.
    The Enlightened take things Lightly.
    No Two Equals are the Same.
    Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
    Is the thought of a Unicorn a Real Thought?
    Curb Your Dogma.
    Discordians don't have dogmas, which are absolute beliefs; we have catmas which are relative meta-beliefs.
    And the central Discordian catma is- any affirmation is true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true and false and meaningless in some sense. And if you repeat this 666 times, you will achieve supreme enlightenment -- IN SOME SENSE!
    --Robert Anton Wilson
    Last edited by Maggie, 24th May 2017 at 04:24.

  4. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Maggie For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th May 2017), Amanda (31st May 2017), Aragorn (24th May 2017), Dreamtimer (24th May 2017), Dumpster Diver (15th April 2018), Elen (24th May 2017), modwiz (24th May 2017)

  5. #33
    Super Moderator United States Dreamtimer's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    9,083
    Thanks
    50,912
    Thanked 40,604 Times in 9,000 Posts
    I've noticed many people, I'm not sure if it's the alt community or people on the right (social/political), who write off protesters and concerned citizens as 'paid'. This is not a good conclusion to jump to for many reasons.

    From the Topeka Capital-Journal:

    Roger Marshall just slandered me in the press. He did the same to almost everyone in attendance at his recent town hall meeting in Wamego. Speaking to American Family Radio on May 12, Marshall accused us of not being from his district and said we were paid to be at the event.

    I wasn’t paid to attend. I’m a poor graduate student that sacrificed time out of my own work and spent several days researching my question because I thought talking to my representative would be helpful. But when I asked it, he rolled his eyes at me and then made false accusations about me to the media. I knew most of the people in the room – they were not paid and they have been living in his district for years, as I have.
    This is unacceptable behavior. This is not what a public servant does. Marshall clearly has no sense of responsibility to those the represents
    The Democratic district chair wrote Marshalls a letter:

    The reason out of town constituents attended the Wamego town hall was because it was one of only two town halls you did not schedule in early morning weekday hours. The vast majority of your constituents have jobs and are unable to take leave to voice their concerns during those morning town halls. So they traveled, meaning it was vitally important for you to hear their voices and concerns, which you seem to be dismissing. It is not their fault you attempted to minimize your interactions by strategic scheduling. It backfired because instead of one or two upset constituents, you had an entire room full.

    As a spouse of a veteran who was stationed at Ft. Riley let me educate you about the possibility of having home of record (out-of-state) license plates on vehicles by many of the military families in our area. So unless you are saying our military families who live in our district don't deserve the right to be heard you can stop trying to make it a conspiracy theory that your town hall was taken over by outsiders.
    There are many people who get bussed to town halls and to vote. It's a dangerous knee-jerk assumption to conclude 'paid' or 'fake'.

    How does the man not know his constituents?

  6. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th May 2017), Amanda (31st May 2017), Aragorn (24th May 2017), Dumpster Diver (15th April 2018), Elen (24th May 2017), modwiz (24th May 2017), Onthebit (20th June 2017)

  7. #34
    Senior Member United States Dumpster Diver's Avatar
    Join Date
    2nd December 2015
    Location
    American Southwest (currently)
    Posts
    2,601
    Thanks
    12,784
    Thanked 13,171 Times in 2,620 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Dreamtimer View Post
    I've noticed many people, I'm not sure if it's the alt community or people on the right (social/political), who write off protesters and concerned citizens as 'paid'. This is not a good conclusion to jump to for many reasons.
    Here's my top-level list of possible "Controlled Opposition" entities:

    Alex Jones
    Ben Fulford
    David Ike
    Bill Ryan and Project Avalon
    Kerry Cassidy
    Steve Greer
    Dark Journalist
    Robert David Steele
    Catherine Austin Fitts
    Ron Paul
    Veteran Times
    ZeroHedge

    All have espoused an idea or two that are negative, and yet are quite vocal.

    Just because I label so many folks as "controlled opposition" doesn't mean it's not true. And certainly being a CO doesn't mean that they are not providing useful information. Indeed, they may be controlled by "white" or "gray" hats. And with the acceptance of control they get some amount of protection, maybe a lot.

  8. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Dumpster Diver For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th May 2017), Amanda (31st May 2017), Aragorn (24th May 2017), Dreamtimer (24th May 2017), Elen (24th May 2017)

  9. #35
    Senior Member PurpleLama's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Posts
    993
    Thanks
    3,461
    Thanked 6,937 Times in 1,006 Posts

    Aragorn was WRONG!

    Quote Originally posted by Aragorn View Post
    This is Law Of One stuff, otherwise also known as the Ra material, as channeled through Edgar Cayce — of whom Wilcock believes he would be the reincarnation — in the 1960s.

    Furthermore, that stuff was also already literally spoken about many years ago at the Above Top Secret forum, by someone who claimed to be an Illuminati insider who had been ordered to entertain questions from forum members for a very limited amount of time, in line with the alleged Illuminati tradition that they may do whatever they want on the condition that they disclose their intentions — albeit sufficiently cryptically, so that only the "awake & aware" would get it.

    The event which was to lead to this alleged three-way split of the collective of human souls on Earth — the good go to "4D", the bad go to "4D negative", and the lukewarm go to another "3D" world, whereby Earth would regress into an earlier state of its evolution as a recovery for all of the things humanity had done to her — was supposed to be 21 December 2012, when Marduk the Destroyer would be coming back. According to this character, Marduk the Destroyer was Lucifer, in the form of the alleged Planet X, also known as Nibiru.

    Said alleged Illuminati insider went by the name "Hidden Hand" over at the Above Top Secret forum, and it is by now generally accepted that the guy was just a prankster, reciting stuff from the Law Of One and other esoteric publications.

    So much for Wilcock's "research".
    HA! I get to call out Aragorn for being incorrect about some minor detail that doesn't really matter! What a great day is this!

    The Law of One was not channelled by Edgar Cayce. Carla Reukert was the channel with the assistance of Don Elkins and Jim McCarty. In the Cayce readings there was some references to the Children of the Law of One, a group which existed in the time of Atlantis, who were in opposition to another group called the Sons of Belial.

    I got to correct Aragorn, haHAha, I got to correct Aragorn!
    Last edited by PurpleLama, 24th May 2017 at 20:32. Reason: I hit the dang button before I was finished gloating.
    Sometimes God shines his magic light beam from outer space, and it works in mysterious ways.

  10. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to PurpleLama For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th May 2017), Amanda (31st May 2017), Aragorn (24th May 2017), Dreamtimer (24th May 2017), Dumpster Diver (15th April 2018), Elen (24th May 2017), Melidae (27th May 2017), modwiz (24th May 2017)

  11. #36
    Administrator Aragorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2015
    Location
    Middle-Earth
    Posts
    13,727
    Thanks
    60,980
    Thanked 56,944 Times in 13,717 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by PurpleLama View Post
    HA! I get to call out Aragorn for being incorrect about some minor detail that doesn't really matter! What a great day is this!

    The Law of One was not channelled by Edgar Cayce. Carla Reukert was the channel with the assistance of Don Elkins and Jim McCarty. In the Cayce readings there was some references to the Children of the Law of One, a group which existed in the time of Atlantis, who were in opposition to another group called the Sons of Belial.

    I got to correct Aragorn, haHAha, I got to correct Aragorn!
    You are correct, and apparently I had the time frame wrong as well. The Law Of One was channeled in the very early 1980s — not the 1960s as I initially wrote — and Edgar Cayce had already passed away in 1945. Strangely enough, I thought he died in the late 1960s.

    Anyway, to err is human. And to arr is pirate.

    = DEATH BEFORE DISHONOR =

  12. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Aragorn For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th May 2017), Amanda (31st May 2017), Dreamtimer (24th May 2017), Dumpster Diver (15th April 2018), Elen (24th May 2017), Lansing (24th May 2017), Melidae (27th May 2017), modwiz (24th May 2017), PurpleLama (24th May 2017)

  13. #37
    Senior Member United States Dumpster Diver's Avatar
    Join Date
    2nd December 2015
    Location
    American Southwest (currently)
    Posts
    2,601
    Thanks
    12,784
    Thanked 13,171 Times in 2,620 Posts
    I think Aragorn is partially remembering that Edgar Cayce was the high priest RaTa in his "Egyptian life" and it was later associated with the Ra group that the Law of One group channeled by Wilcock.

    Wilcock lived with Paula Ruckert for a while, supposedly getting all the "facts" on the Law of One work and I think wired up with CG who had been "tapped" by the blue bird Raw-Tir-Eir. Since supposedly both Law of one Channeled entity and Raw-Tir-Eir started their statements with "I am Ra," Wilcock snapped it up and bought CG's story.

  14. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dumpster Diver For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th May 2017), Amanda (31st May 2017), Aragorn (25th May 2017), Dreamtimer (24th May 2017)

  15. #38
    Senior Member PurpleLama's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Posts
    993
    Thanks
    3,461
    Thanked 6,937 Times in 1,006 Posts
    For being the foremost authority on the Law of One, Wilcock sure gets his details wrong (sorta like Aragorn).

    Cayce did identify a previous incarnation as the high priest Ra-ta, but such was never mentioned in the Law of One, Wilcock totally got that one from Cayce. The only thing is, Cayce predicted his future incarnation in the mid to late nineties, not in the late sixties. But, one like Wilcock (or Aragorn) can't get bogged down by little details like that. Wilcock did stay at the compound with Carla Reukertband Jim McCarty, but he never got their endorsement, not that of the Cayce family or the ARE, although I have heard it said (recently) that Cayce's descendents are fairly divided over the possibility of Wilcock being his reincarnation.

    I personally believe that Wilcock is the reincarnation, as much as I believe he should go back and reread the actual readings and what they say, as well as revisiting the actual text of the Law of One. I like to point out, that according to Cayce his previous incarnation was a gambler and a womanizer, and Wilcock might want to entertain the notion that one's karma does not solely arise from what might seem the previous incarnation.

    We choose for each lifetime which lessons to tackle, and fame and fortune certainly weren't on the plate for Cayce, but some of the lessons Cayce did master may be getting walked back before our very eyes in the person of Wilcock.
    Sometimes God shines his magic light beam from outer space, and it works in mysterious ways.

  16. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to PurpleLama For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th May 2017), Amanda (31st May 2017), Dreamtimer (24th May 2017), Dumpster Diver (15th April 2018), Elen (24th May 2017), Maggie (24th May 2017), Melidae (27th May 2017), modwiz (24th May 2017)

  17. #39
    Retired Member United States
    Join Date
    8th November 2015
    Posts
    1,264
    Thanks
    1,691
    Thanked 7,654 Times in 1,264 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by PurpleLama View Post
    I personally believe that Wilcock is the reincarnation, as much as I believe he should go back and reread the actual readings and what they say, as well as revisiting the actual text of the Law of One.
    I am curious about what led you to agree Wilcock's claim is authentic?
    Here the evidence was based a lot on similar "looks".


    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzsPhgN6FwQ


    Here is David's article about himself WRITTEN IN THIRD PERSON (IMO a weird possibly sociopathic "Tell")
    The Reincarnation of Edgar Cayce and His Soul Group?
    You Decide.
    By David Wilcock


    Appearance as a significator for reincarnation seems superficial especially for someone who has ventured through many life times.

    As we know cayce was extraordinary on his physical readings that he took from the subconscious of others but in dream prophecy, the energy he read was not fulfilled in "our" timeline.

    In 1936, Edgar Cayce had a prophetic dream of his reincarnation in the new USA:
    "I had been born again in 2100 A.D. in Nebraska. The sea apparently covered all of the western part of the country, as the city where I lived was on the coast. The family name was a strange one. At an early age as a child I declared myself to be Edgar Cayce who had lived 200 years before. Scientists, men with long beads, little hair, and thick glasses, were called in to observe me. They decided to visit the places where I said I had been born, lived, and worked in Kentucky, Alabama, New York, Michigan, and Virginia. Taking me with them the group of scientists visited these places in a long, cigar-shaped metal flying ship which moved at a high speed. Water covered part of Alabama. Norfolk, Virginia, had become an immense seaport. New York had been destroyed either by war or an immense earthquake and was being rebuilt. Industries were scattered over the countryside. Most of the houses were built of glass. Many records of my work as Edgar Cayce were discovered and collected. The group returned to Nebraska, taking the records with them to study... These changes in the earth will come to pass, for the time and times and half times are at an end, and there begins those periods for the readjustments..."

    David Martinique, the author of Edgar Cayce and the End Times has claimed that Cayce received several terrifying prophecies of doom in the months before he died in 1945. His private journal was left to a friend with instructions that it be kept secret until October 30, 1994. The diary includes seven predictions for 1995-1999, and gives this warning:
    "Let all wise men heed the predictions herein. The earthly reign of the Lord truly is at hand."https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/p...ofecia01h4.htm (24)
    There is a book The Reincarnation of Edgar Cayce?: Interdimensional Communication and Global Transformation 11, 2004
    by Wynn Free (Author), David Wilcock (Author)
    The following scholarly review on Amazon (link to site above) is long but I think worth reading.

    ByAnn S.on May 8, 2013

    I have been a student of the Edgar Cayce readings for over 30 years, and have spent hundreds of hours absorbing the material on the CD-ROM as well as a couple hundred books. I've known since 2000 of David Wilcock's claim that he is Cayce returned, but never felt the slighted interest in learning more about him or his claim. By coincidence I had just finished the 5 Law Of One books channeled thru Carla Rueckert, and decided on a whim to learn more of Wilcock's claim, just in case he really IS Cayce. I had no idea of the connection between the Law Of One books and this book, but the timing couldn't have been better since the The Law of One RA material was still fresh in my mind. (Note that I use RA when referring to The Law of One material, and Ra with a lower-case "a" when referring to the high priest, also called Ra-Ta who was a prior incarnation of Edgar Cayce in ancient Egypt). I approached this with an absolutely open mind. Had I been shunning CAYCE? I was determined to find out.

    This author states that he is very familiar with Cayce's life and readings as well as the Law Of One Material, but I didn't get far into the book before the glaring inaccuracies began to pile up. Either Wynn Free blatently misrepresents and ignores the known facts, or he just wants Wilcock to be Cayce so badly that he makes it happen for himself and his readers. I gave Free the opportunity to prove his case.

    First, He is trying to make the case that Cayce's "Source" must have been the group soul or social memory complex of RA, the same source as gave the Law Of One material as well as the Dream Voice and entity supposedly channeled thru Wilcock. He is basing this on the fact that Wilcock's Dream Voice said so. In putting forth that theory, he ignores and twists the facts. For instance, on p.76, he states, "Edgar Cayce's readings were delivered to him by what he identified only as the Source." Nothing could be further from the truth, and my jaw hit the floor when Free made this statement! Cayce was asked many times in trance where he got his information. The series of readings 3744-1 thru 5 answers that for us. Also 294-19, 254-68, 294-1, 900-233, as well as others. All these Cayce readings clearly tell us that for his health readings he gets the information from the subconscious mind of the ailing person, as well as the subconscious minds of others, especially for the remedies; the Akashic Records is the source of most of the remaining information, from life readings, to the creation story, to ancient civilizations, to future earth changes and prophecy. The Akashic Records is the record of every Soul and every activity from the beginning of creation, as recorded on the skein of time and space, according to Cayce. Cayce's own Higher Self, his Subconscious Mind of the Soul, would have provided information as well, but Cayce did NOT channel, though on extremely rare occasions an entity would come through, such as the Archangels Michael and Halaliel. 254-83 is an example of this, and is a beautiful reading where "Thine Identity" is asked for. The answer is "those Universal Forces. Messengers from the Higher Forces that may manifest from the Throne of Grace Itself." When asked "who are the Masters directly in charge?" Cayce answered, "Those that are directed by the Lord of Lords, the King of Kings, Him that came that ye might be one with the Father. These are messengers of the Most High" When asked who Halaliel is in this same reading, Cayce gave this, "Halaliel is the one who from the beginning has been a leader of the heavenly host, who has defied Ariel, who has made the ways that have been heavy-but as the means for the UNDERSTANDING."

    Mr. Free quotes from the channelings of Wilcock on p.155, "(Cayce) was eventually able to realize through our guidance that Halaliel was sort of a trickster entity, designed to depolarize the contact somewhat." Why does Free believe this to be true? Because Halaliel gave the information about "the cataclysmic earth changes such as Japan going beneath the sea (The tsunami in Japan WAS cataclysmic though wasn't it) and of the inundation of California and the like." Other earth changes predicted by Cayce were to be gradual. But Wilcock's channeled voice said that Cayce had opened himself to negative entities and Halaliel was a negative trickster. As far as I can tell, there is not one shred of evidence to support the claim that Cayce was convinced of that. If Cayce received messages, he wanted them to be from the highest possible source, the "MOST HIGH." Halaliel had offered thru a reading for the study group to be channeled thru Cayce, offering his wisdom and his aid. Free states that the study group members and Gladys Davis "had doubt and concern as to whether they could trust Halaliel". They debated and discussed this among themselves for weeks before deciding as a group that only the "Most High" should be sought. Obviously, if Halaliel was thought by Cayce to be a trickster entity, there would have been no long discussion of the matter. Free really reaches to make us believe that, as Wilcock says, Cayce channeled negative entities.

    Oddly, Free even totally ignores the answer to the question of Cayce's source as given by RA himself when asked by Don Elkins in the first Law Of One book! Session 14, p.141 Elkins asks, "Who spoke thru Edgar Cayce?" A: "No entity spoke thru Edgar Cayce." Q: "Where did the information come from that Edgar Cayce channeled?" A: "...intelligent infinity is brought into intelligent energy from eighth density or octave. Edgar used this gateway to view the present...this is the Akashic Records or the Hall of Records." RA is stating the same thing that Cayce said about his source: THE AKASHIC RECORD WAS CAYCE'S MOST FREQUENT SOURCE. If RA was the source for Cayce's information, he/they would have said so when asked point blank, especially almost 40 years after Cayce died, what did they/he have to lose? These are glaring omissions on the part of the author. He totally disregarded the voices of both Cayce and RA to try to establish his theory!

    On p.78 the author, obviously realizing that the question would come up as to why RA never identified himself as Cayce's Source, has a ready answer. "If RA was Cayce's main Source, it couldn't be revealed to him in his own readings due to his conservative Christian upbringing." Really?? Many topics, including reincarnation, astrology, kundalini meditation, karma, pre-existance of the soul, as well as other controversial subjects were discoursed upon by Cayce in trance, and they were strongly AGAINST his conservative Christian upbringing. He read the Akashic Records, he didn't have an entity or a 'social memory complex' as a source. Don Elkins even asked RA if he/they had channeled thru others, and he did NOT mention Cayce in his answer. As I said, why wouldn't RA state that as fact almost 40 years later, if indeed Cayce's source was RA!? RA also tells us thru Carla R. that discarnate entities from Earth's inner planes are the most common source (and the most inaccurate because these entities frequently lie) of all channeled material. Of course, channeling discarnate entities such as is done by Wilcock is not the only way to obtain otherworldly information, as Cayce has shown. Should we allow Wilcock's Ra voice to make claims for Cayce that counter what Cayce himself had given? Should we also disregard the Law of One RA answer to this question? Perhaps we should let Cayce speak for himself on this instead of Mr. Free presuming that he and Wilcock know more about Cayce's source than Cayce knew! This begs the next question: WHY DID WYNN FREE LIE AND SAY "EDGAR CAYCE'S READINGS WERE DELIVERED TO HIM BY WHAT HE IDENTIFIED ONLY AS THE 'SOURCE'"? Perhaps it wasn't an intentional lie. Perhaps he just wasn't as thorough in his research as he needed to be, but if so, the lack of due diligence is certainly disturbing. What else in this book is blatantly false?

    Now there's Egypt and the Great Pyramid. Also on p.78 do we find the following from the author, "I did a search on the Cayce CD-ROM, and to my surprise I found numerous incidents in the lifetime of Ra-TA where Ra-Ta and a being named Ra existed concurrently." Please, Mr. Free, if you know the Cayce material, you should know that Ra was short for Ra-Ta! They are one and the same and there is a reading that states that Ra-Ta was later called Ra. Several readings in fact. Yes, the same entity! On p.160 he tries to convince his readers that "...most Cayce scholars have never considered these indications of Ra-Ta and Ra being two distinct entities.." Mr. Free, Edgar Cayce had a very unique syntax; it takes practice to understand what is being conveyed in some of the readings, BUT, the Cayce scholars, and not you, have this one figured out: RA-Ta and Ra are one in the same. These Readings have been studied by many, many great minds over the years who are very familiar with the Cayce material. Do you really think they "never considered" this?

    The Law of One material tells us that the Great Pyramid was built using thought forms, not levitating rocks, as this author claims. Yes, the remaining pyramids were build by levitation, but not the GREAT Pyramid! Here are the relevant sessions and quotes:

    Book 1,p.78-79 Session 3: "I am RA. The pyramids which we thought/built were constructed thought-forms created by our social memory complex." Q: "Then the rock was created in place rather than moved from some place else?" A: "We built with everlasting rock the GREAT PYRAMID, as you call it. Other of the pyramids were built with stone moved from one place to another." Don Elkins then asks why the Great Pyramid was built with many blocks rather than creating the whole thing as one form created at once. A: "We did not desire to allow the mystery to be penetrated by the peoples in such a way that we became worshiped as builders of a miraculous pyramid. Thus it appears to be made, not thought." Again, p.205, session 23, quoting RA, "The first, the GREAT Pyramid, was formed approximately 6,000 of your years ago (4,000 B.C.) Then, in sequence, after this performing by THOUGHT of the building or architecture of the Great Pyramid using local or earthly material rather than thought-form materials to build the other pyramid structures." So, the Great Pyramid was built by thought-form material and the remaining pyramids were built by levitating and moving earthly rocks, all this according to RA thru Carla R. Why exactly is Free stating that according to RA in the Law of One books, all the pyramids were build by LEVITATION around 10,500 B.C.?? THIS IS CLEARLY NOT WHAT RA SAID!! Very, odd!! But, as we shall see, he may have a reason for these misleading statements.

    Now, Cayce reading 5648-6 tells us that the Great Pyramid was build over a 100 year period 10,490 to 10,390 B.C. further, "Begun and completed in the period of Araaraart's time, with Hermes (an incarnation of Christ) and Ra (the incarnation of Cayce)" Notice Ra-Ta is shortened to Ra here, but the same Egyptian High Priest is being referred to. How were the pyramids build according to Cayce? Let's look at Reading 5748-6:

    Q: "How was this particular Great Pyramid of Gizah built?" A: "By the use of those forces in nature as make for iron to swim. Stone floats in the air in the same manner." Cayce is saying that the GREAT PYRAMID was built by levitation. Not by thought-form as stated by RA, but by levitation just as RA said the other pyramids were built. And was the Great Pyramid built around 10,500 B.C. as per Cayce, or 4,000 B.C. as per RA? I have no idea, but here is Wynn Free's take on it: on page 76 he quotes from Session 1 the Law of One RA material "We spoke to one who heard and understood and was in a position to decree the Law Of One" It is this RA quote that he believes proves that Edgar Cayce's incarnation of the high priest Ra-Ta is the "one who heard and understood and was in a position to decree the Law of One." But there are valid reasons to dispute this.

    Firstly, RA goes on after this sentence to say, "However, the PRIESTS and the peoples of that era quickly distorted our message..." It appears as though the "one who heard and understood" was not a priest; the priests distorted the message. Would a priest be "in a position to decree the Law Of One?" or would that be the pharaoh? The very next day, in Session 2, RA goes on to state that he/they contacted a pharaoh, "Ikhnaton (who) became convinced that the vibration of One was the true spiritual vibration and thus DECREED THE LAW OF ONE. However, this entity's belief's were accepted by very few. HIS PRIESTS gave lip service only." The priests gave lip service to the law that was decreed by the pharaoh, the only one in the position to do so! So, it was NOT Cayce as Ra-Ta who decreed this; no, not Ra-Ta the high priest after all. In fact, contrary to this author's claim on page 80, their was NO priest mentioned in these Sessions as being contacted by RA. NO HIGH PRIEST. But Mr.Free clearly states that RA assisted a priest in 10,500 B.C. When did RA go to Egypt? in the RA Sessions it is not clear in the context if they first arrived or returned 11,000 years ago (9,000 B.C.). It's unclear if they contacted the pharaoh in person or thru or dream or in another way. But 9,000 B.C is not close to 10,500 B.C regardless.

    Free clearly tells his readers on p.76 that "at the outset of the Law of One sessions (with Carla R. Egypt was discoursed upon in the first 2 sessions) there was a specific reference to an intervention where RA, the social memory complex, contacted an entity who became an Egytian high priest in 10,500 B.C. RA had a telepathic connection with this high priest, and together they built the pyramids from levitation of rock." Free then goes on to take out of order and out of context RA passages from session 6, leading the reader to think the high priest and 10,500 B.C. was mentioned in session 6, which it was not. Part of that corrupted passage Free has as "Our visit was relatively short. This is when we built the pyramids. When we chose the mission..." The problem is, "This is when we built the pyramids" never appears in session 6. He takes several sentences from different portions of the book and strings them together to make one paragraph without quotation marks and misleads the reader!

    I went to the searchable portion of the lawofone.com and searched 'priest', 'high priest', '10,500', as well as '12,000' since Free commented on this review (prior to this update)and said that he found the reference to 12,000 years ago from a blog there. NO match for any of these searches corresponded to this Egyptian information given by RA as stated by Mr.Free. If you read the comments to this review, you will see that Wynn Free wanted to discuss this review with me, so I asked him to reveal which of the 104 RA Sessions he found the priest/12,000 year information in. Ok. A blog yes, but a blog is NOT a RA session and according to the book, it was the RA Material that he found it in. Maybe he will have better luck than I had in finding it.

    Why is all this important? Remember, the author is trying to tie Cayce to RA, the source for the Law of One material, and is trying to show that not only did Cayce channel RA, but has returned as Wilcock, who now supposedly channels RA as well. To prove all this, he needs to show that all this material from the three sources is consistent. Which it most assuredly is not. So the big question here should be, 'if RA was Cayce's source, why isn't RA's material CONSISTENT?' Why would RA give Cayce different information than he/they channeled thru Carla Rueckert? Perhaps the more relevant question to this discussion is, 'is Wynn Free mis-stating what was said by RA in the Law of One material so it will more closely match Cayce's information? He is clearly trying hard to show the connection, but we saw above that RA said the Great Pyramid was built by thought-form around 4,000 B.C. Cayce said it was built around 10,500 by a type of levitation, as well as other inconsistent statements.

    What are we to make of Wilcock looking like Cayce? There is one photo of a young Wilcock that, when put next to a photo of Cayce about the same age, looks very close. Not twins, but very similar. The current photo of Wilcock that's on his website now looks nothing like Cayce, nor do any other pictures I've come across. Those two pictures though, when side by side sure appear intriguing, but is that particular photo un-retouched? We don't know. On his website is a picture of him at 17, which would have been 1990 and I believe it was 1999 when he posted the other picture online next to Cayce, so it was obviously '99 or prior. So why does THAT one picture look so different than his 17-year old self? The chin is far more pointy, the eyes different; his lips much fuller and slightly parted just like Cayce's. It's obvious that he was trying to strike the same pose and facial expression as Cayce, but I won't go so far as to accuse him of retouching the photo. But I do wonder.

    Much was been made in Free's book about the similar horoscopes of Cayce and Wilcock. Now, this is something I can speak to, being an amateur astrologer. Their birthdays are 10 days apart. 1877 and 1973. So, of course, March birthdays, they are both Pisces Sun. Between the other planets and luminaries, they share the placement of the Moon, Mercury, Venus and Mars. Is this so unusual? After all, there are only 12 signs that each planet can land in. Free does NOT mention that Saturn, Jupiter, the very important outer planets of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto, as well as the Lunar Nodes, and the most personal point in a horoscope, the Ascendant Sign (or Rising Sign) are ALL different. I have not done a chart for David Wilcock, so I don't know, and Free does not tell us, how close the planets are when comparing the two charts, except for the moon, which are almost exact. It so happens that my brother was born on March 9. He shares with Edgar Cayce the Pisces Sun of course, but also Mercury, Jupiter, Uranus, and the Ascendant. I do not believe him to be Edgar Cayce, nor is it at all unusual for people with the same sun sign to share the placement of several planets.

    Wilcock appears resentful that the A.R.E. will not endorse him as Cayce's return and Free echoes that resentment, "accepting Wilcock would jeopardize the status quo." Seriously, the Mr. Free? Yeah. That's it; they just don't want to jeopardize the status quo. Cayce himself created (and Free adds "without the endorsement or guidance of his source", as though the man couldn't make an intelligent decision on his own) a test for anyone who claimed to be his reincarnation. The test consists of 5 personal questions that only he would know and WILCOCK REFUSED TO TAKE THE TEST! It would have have made him too nervous to be asked these 5 questions by those negative A.R.E. folks. Free further insults Cayce's intelligence by stating that "since he was not consciously aware of the veil of forgetting, his idea was that he would still be in possession of memories from his former life." OK, Mr. Free, now Edgar Cayce was such a naive, backward, simple man that he was not aware that an entity forgets a past life upon return? MY GOD, he gave over 2,000 Life Readings, telling people who they were in past lives, and YOU and WILCOCK think he didn't know that??? There are a couple points here that you obviously don't understand. 1) Cayce knew on a very deep soul level that he would remember. He knew he was not an ordinary soul and even in a waking state possessed miraculous powers. The directors of A.R.E also know that if Cayce stated he would remember, than he WILL remember. 2) If you read his collected letters, memoirs, lectures, and teachings, you would know what an absolutely wise sage he was. The last 20 years of his life, he showed great wisdom AWAKE and had the utmost confidence in his beliefs and his readings. Try reading some the attached correspondence from his clients on the Cayce CD. 3) He absolutely knew that there would be a few folks out there that really believed they were him and set up a way for they A.R.E to deal with that inevitability. He knew that only HIS soul RETURNED could answer those questions. But Free doesn't stop there, he then seems to believe that the A.R.E. directors are a bunch of paranoid loonies. Why? They don't advocate UFO's, for one thing. Cayce made only ONE off-handed statement about the Earth being visited by ET's (he did not even say ET, that's mine) during a reading for a woman, who had lived in South America thousands of years ago, and in passing told her that it was during the time in history when the Earth was visited by those from "other worlds or planets." The A.R.E. exists to distribute Cayce's wisdom and carry on his legacy, and that just doesn't include UFO's. 4) This point has to do with Wilcock himself: why wouldn't he have obtained the 5 answers from RA prior to the test? Surely, the all-knowing RA would have known the questions in advance as well as the answers to them, would he not? For that matter, couldn't Wilcock have accessed the Universal Consciousness to obtain the questions and the answers?? He could if he was Cayce. No, because those A.R.E people made him nervous. Perhaps the A.R.E. should have just taken Wilcock's word for it. Yeah. And based on what? His facial features and the fact that he could make predictions about Y2K and 2012 that were wrong? We even have to take Wilcock's word for it that when he moved to Virginia Beach, people were so impressed by his looks. For that matter, did he move to Virginia Beach (again, his RA voice told him to) to say he fulfilled Cayce's prophecy of living there when he returned? He didn't stay long. Of course, we all know the Cacye reading predicts the return of the priest, Ra-Ta in '98; it does NOT say that the return would be announced in '98, but that the return itself would happen in '98. There's a huge difference here that Wilcock seems quite willing to overlook. If Cayce was reborn in 1998 he would be 15 this year; wouldn't it be a shame if in a few years nobody believes him because so many think he's already here in the person of Wilcock?

    Wilcock freely admits that he publicly announced that he was Cayce's return to "GET ATTENTION" (RA told him to), but his false modesty is rather transparent however, when he claims to dislike the spotlight. He doesn't know the answers to 5 personal questions, but over and over again, he uses the word '(self)aggrandizement', a uniquely Cayce word. Who besides Cayce do we know that ever used that word?? Of course even though we know that Wilcock read at least 300 metaphysical books in college as well as his mother's vast metaphysical library, he must have NEVER come across Cayce and that word; just as he hadn't read the name Amilius, according to him, even though by that time he admitted to having read many Cayce books on Atlantis (the name Amilius was given during a channeled reading, so he believed that there must be a connection to Cayce).It's doubtful that there's been a book written about Cayce's Atlantis story that didn't include the name Amilius. He also uses the word 'grandiose', another rare Cayce word. But none of this is forced, of course. Those rare and dated words just come naturally to Wilcock it must be.

    While reading the 5 books in the RA series, I of course noticed some material consistent with Cayce's, but shouldn't they be consistent since it's HISTORY? Should we expect seperate versions of history? But there are also many more inconsistencies between the two groups of material too, which is something one would NOT expect from the same source.

    According to Edgar Cayce, Jesus Christ (Jesus in one life, Melchizedek in another, Amilius, Hermes, Adam, Joseph, Jeshuah, Joshuah. Christ in all)is the Master of Masters, the Logos, the Ideal, who took upon himself the task of leading humanity back to the father. We are to diligently strive for the Christ Consciousness and hold as our ideal that perfection. BUT, according to RA thru Carla R. Jesus was a 4th density entity (RA has evolved much higher than Jesus and is a 6th density soul group) who returned as a wanderer to earth. He had a particularly good memory and with that he quickly learned to penetrate Intelligent Infinity as a youth when he became angry with a playmate and killed him with his touch. He then determined to use that power for good, and could thus heal and perform other miracles. See RA Session 17 for this story. Why are these two Christ stories so very different if, as Wilcock's RA and Free maintain, they originate with the same source, RA? This is not the only inconsistency, however.

    What does Cayce have to say about spiritual evolution? We get "to Heaven leaning on the arm of someone we've helped." Soul growth and progression does NOT occur without a love for others; without putting aside our own desires, wishes, and selfishness, and seeking to be of service to our fellow human beings, and striving to do the work of our Creator while in the Earth plane. How does this compare to RA? According to the Law of One material, service-to-self is just as valid as service-to-others. Selfishness is a legitimate and acceptable form of spiritual growth and evolution. These entities can lie, manipulate, enslave, and control others; whether of positive or negative polarity, it doesn't matter (at least until they reach 6th density). Both are equally valid. We all know there are negative entities of course, but this is a valid path to spiritual growth?? Personally, until RA I had NEVER heard of anything like this. Not from Gandhi, Buddha, Christ, Muhammad, or other spiritual masters. Not from Jane Roberts/Seth, Cayce, Steiner, Swedenborg, Gurdjieff, or any ancient text, channeled material, or other source. This is NOT a consistent point between RA and Cayce.

    What does Mr. Free make of these differences and inconsistencies? Well, of course, those lying negative entities, of which Halaliel was one, must have lied thru Cayce and created these inconsistencies. Of course. Yes, that must be it. RA said so. Thru Wilcock.

    Does this mean that the entire book has no merit and was not worth the read? Not entirely. Wilcock is probably a sincere man who seeks to do the right thing. It appears that he has/had definite psychic abilities, and he is most certainly channeling some entity, or perhaps the information comes from his own subconscious soul mind. We have no way of knowing if this is RA except to take RA's word for it. Since the Ascension and/or dimensional shift has not occurred as predicted; no Y2K disaster; no dimensional shift culminating December 21, 2012, I am hesitant to believe any Wilcock/RA predictions. Throughout the book, Free calls Wilcocks predictions "amazingly accurate. Precise", and Free shares with us "some of the more specific predictions and prophecies". Let's examine a few of these:

    PREDICTION ONE: RA casually mentions Habitu in a reading and the same day Wilcock drove by a restaurant named Habitu. That's a prediction?? A prediction of WHAT? This is what Jung would call a synchronicity, but this is an amazing prediction according to Free. PREDICTION TWO: Wilcock believes this to be a prediction of an auto accident he had later that day, and I agree, it certainly could be that. "It's the greatest science fiction story ever told. Someone comes in-rescue 911. CBS and ABC give adequate coverge. A cast-iron fence is wrought around the victim's body. An impenetrable wall needs only be potentiated by positive energy." When the Sept. 11th terrorist attacks occurred 5 years later, Wilcock determined that this was not only a prediction of his accident, but also a prophecy of 9/11. This reading could actually mean just about any accident at all, auto; plane; car; collapsed building; tornado; flood, this could be anything, but again, Wilcock and Free believe this to be amazing and specific. This is their analysis even though it is anything but specific and even though Free tells us on p.130 that "even when he makes future predictions, they are usually couched in metaphor and cryptically encoded so that they only become obvious after the event has occurred." How can a prediction be called specific if it could have to do with many things, and is decidedly non-specific? If a cruise ship had sunk 5 or even 10 years later, would this then have been the prediction of a sinking cruise ship? That appears to be the case.

    Other of his readings are even more questionable. Evidently, he predicted calamity during Y2K and that didn't materialize because, according to him, he listened to Art Bell on the radio. O.K. But RA gave him readings in Sept. and Oct. 1999 predicting devastation. Presumably, it was this prediction that was the reason for the name of his (now defunct) website ascension2000. He expected the global ascension in 2000. When that didn't pan out he evidently changed the predicted date, as Free tells us on p.29, "...2012, which interestingly is the end-date for the Mayan Calendar and the year when WILCOCK'S PREDICTED DIMENSIONAL SHIFT WILL CULMINATE." (I'm writing this 5/2013). In the Law of One RA material, RA told Don Elkins in 1981 that this dimensional shift would take place over the next 30 years and would be complete by 2011. Maybe RA is the negative trickster??

    If RA is so inaccurate, exactly how are we to believe anything from him/they, either thru Wilcock or Carla R.? Let alone when he/they spoke of being Cayce's source! What about his other readings? His readings archive are only available on his website for a $72 yearly fee, so I can only comment on the readings in this book. I was very unimpressed by them. The client reading was non-specific, generalized fluff aside from a couple comments pertaining to music. The remainder of it was so general that it could apply to anybody on the planet! The other readings given to David were also fluff. Mostly just a reiteration of the Law of One and other metaphysical material that Wilcock was already familiar with. RA spent a lot of time telling Wilcock how loved and cherished and special he is, and the questions he asked of them/him were all about himself. Compare that to when, at the age of 13, Edgar Cayce was visited by an angel and asked what he wished for most in life. His answer was not "to make money doing this", or anything selfish. He answered that more than anything he wished to be of aid to others, especially children. Not only did he receive his wish as a gift, but we can be very certain that the Higher Forces were protecting him from harm and negativity while he carried out his mission.

    David Wilcock does a great job of collecting and collating the work of researchers and scientists. The chapter titled "The Energetic Engine of Evolution" was interesting, and well-written. Wilcock said he printed a 10-foot high stack of information from the internet, so he obviously works hard at putting all this information together in a format that makes sense and flows well. He is obviously an intelligent, talented man. I personally do not think that his Cayce claim has served him well, although it's apparent that he believes whatever his Dream Voice/RA Source has told him. Perhaps he needed to be a bit more discerning. In the eyes of many, he's made a fool of himself by claiming a Cayce heritage and predicting when the dimensional shift and ascension would occur.

    Cayce was a humble and selfless soul, who cared only to alleviate suffering and serve his Creator. Free says that Cayce "never had enough confidence" in his readings to charge more than a nominal fee. Not true. He came to greatly believe in the readings, and if you read the transcripts of his letters, lectures, and memoirs, you will see how wise he was. Would we expect Cayce to return as a man who seeks fame and fortune as a cult-hero-type, attention-seeker or as the quiet, humble, wise soul we was? If Wilcock is Cayce's return, this is soul regression instead of soul progression. If a person could get past Wilcock's staff and beg for a reading, for free because they have no money, to try to save a dying loved one, would Wilcock do it? Would Cayce? We know the answer. You will know them by their fruit.
    Last edited by Maggie, 24th May 2017 at 22:42.

  18. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Maggie For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (31st May 2017), Aragorn (25th May 2017), Dreamtimer (24th May 2017), Dumpster Diver (15th April 2018), Melidae (27th May 2017), modwiz (25th May 2017), Onthebit (20th June 2017), PurpleLama (24th May 2017), whole1 (2nd November 2017)

  19. #40
    Senior Member Fred Steeves's Avatar
    Join Date
    1st May 2016
    Location
    East Tennessee U.S.A.
    Posts
    974
    Thanks
    1,393
    Thanked 6,028 Times in 978 Posts
    You will know them by their fruit.
    Tru dat.

  20. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Fred Steeves For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (31st May 2017), Aragorn (25th May 2017), Dreamtimer (24th May 2017), Dumpster Diver (15th April 2018), Maggie (24th May 2017), modwiz (25th May 2017), PurpleLama (24th May 2017)

  21. #41
    Senior Member PurpleLama's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Posts
    993
    Thanks
    3,461
    Thanked 6,937 Times in 1,006 Posts
    Indeed, Maggie, I have noted many discrepancies between what Wilcock says and what the two sets of readings do say, many of which were enumerated by the person who wrote that review, and some others besides. Keeping in mind what Cayce said about his previous incarnation, and what I grok about the transmigration of souls, I still do not discount the possibility that Wilcock is (failing to) learn(ing) a set of lessons in self aggrandizement. That being as a reincarnation of Cayce, or not. I am not a Wilcock fan, so I am by no means married to the supposition.
    Sometimes God shines his magic light beam from outer space, and it works in mysterious ways.

  22. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to PurpleLama For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (31st May 2017), Dreamtimer (24th May 2017), Dumpster Diver (15th April 2018), Maggie (24th May 2017), Melidae (27th May 2017), modwiz (25th May 2017)

  23. #42
    Senior Member United States Dumpster Diver's Avatar
    Join Date
    2nd December 2015
    Location
    American Southwest (currently)
    Posts
    2,601
    Thanks
    12,784
    Thanked 13,171 Times in 2,620 Posts
    As I recall, neither David Wilcock, nor ascension, nor Aragorn are among the areas we can all agree on here in the "Alt World."

    However, since we are talking about it, I'd certainly like it if anyone can provide any illumination on this ascension thing, Wilcockian or otherwise. I keep hearing folks say they don't like it, but I'm looking for evidence, for or against, not opinions. I'm finding evidence for, none against (but trying hard to stay away from asking folks to prove a negative).

  24. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dumpster Diver For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (31st May 2017), Aragorn (25th May 2017), Dreamtimer (25th May 2017)

  25. #43
    Senior Member PurpleLama's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Posts
    993
    Thanks
    3,461
    Thanked 6,937 Times in 1,006 Posts
    Ascension? The world ended over a decade ago, and nobody noticed.
    Sometimes God shines his magic light beam from outer space, and it works in mysterious ways.

  26. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to PurpleLama For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (31st May 2017), Aragorn (25th May 2017), Dreamtimer (25th May 2017), Dumpster Diver (15th April 2018), Melidae (27th May 2017), modwiz (25th May 2017)

  27. #44
    Senior Member United States Dumpster Diver's Avatar
    Join Date
    2nd December 2015
    Location
    American Southwest (currently)
    Posts
    2,601
    Thanks
    12,784
    Thanked 13,171 Times in 2,620 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by PurpleLama View Post
    Ascension? The world ended over a decade ago, and nobody noticed.
    Yeah, and somewhere in the background I can hear Celine Dion singing, "My Heart will go on...and on...and on...and on"

  28. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dumpster Diver For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (31st May 2017), Aragorn (25th May 2017), Dreamtimer (25th May 2017), PurpleLama (25th May 2017)

  29. #45
    Senior Member Fred Steeves's Avatar
    Join Date
    1st May 2016
    Location
    East Tennessee U.S.A.
    Posts
    974
    Thanks
    1,393
    Thanked 6,028 Times in 978 Posts
    A very good metaphor, of the feeling when it's time to move beyond the safe confines of alt media.

  30. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Fred Steeves For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (31st May 2017), Aragorn (25th May 2017), Dreamtimer (25th May 2017), Dumpster Diver (15th April 2018), Melidae (27th May 2017), modwiz (25th May 2017), PurpleLama (25th May 2017)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •