Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Reply to Prometheus

Expand Messages
  • makiztor
    Prometheus wrote: Etznab, if you have read the archives of our posts on Eckankar and the Links you will then have a better idea of our thoughts and
    Message 1 of 2 , Nov 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Prometheus wrote:

      Etznab, if you have read the archives of our posts on Eckankar and
      the Links you will then have a better idea of our thoughts and
      experiences. The who, what, WHY, when and how will become clearer. I
      am glad that you have come here and I'm interested in your
      experiences and views, except, this site will remain an anti-
      Eckankar site while exploring other topics. We've been there, done
      that, and bought the tee shirt (literally too)!

      Etznab:

      Yes, I see what you are saying. And to some extent I empathize.
      Thanks for being kind.

      Etznab
    • makiztor
      I responded and showed that I was not a machine without innate ability to interpret experiences. If I were a machine and if Eckankar were only like a program
      Message 2 of 2 , Nov 9, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        I responded and showed that I was not a machine without innate
        ability to interpret experiences. If I were a machine and if Eckankar
        were only like a program to which I could not respond but only react,
        then I would want to unplug. But what is my Experience of Eck is not
        what is the experience of others. It is unique to me. I had no mind
        to unplug from my experience - even before the question was asked.

        The reference to unplugging from Confessions involved the part
        about Graham. It didn't mean Ford's book did not inspire me to
        research further into the recorded history of the outer teachings. I
        already, in another post, explained that it was not the entire book
        that I wanted to unplug from.

        I can very well illustrate this. In fact I already did this years
        ago at:

        http://mirrorh.com/E-TriviaTimeline3.html

        If you go to that page of my timeline and read the entry for
        October 21st, 2001, it will show what Graham said:

        "It is not my intention to do this, it never was, yet I have been
        asked to place these experiences in front of Sri Harold. When M__
        V____, and L___ K___ spoke very highly of you it seemed a good idea
        to approach you."

        This is what I read from the book. I read that it was Lisa Kyle,
        in a letter (10/05/2001) who mentioned the journal to Ford Johnson.
        In effect:

        "Myself and a fellow H.I., Mary Voaden, are in contact with an
        individual who is having the most profound inner experiences and
        initiations seemingly on the same levels and also those beyond those
        of Paul and Harold."

        I read that Ford went to England to arrange a meeting with Mary,
        Lisa and Graham. And that Mary and Lisa also accompanied Graham to
        the states to meet with Harold and Ford.

        Earlier than this I discovered that a response from Chungchok to
        Graham (October 3rd, 2001) mentioned the word "Tom". But this was
        AFTER Mary inquired about Chungchok and mentioned the name to Graham.
        It was also Mary who gave a video to Graham showing Ford Johnson
        giving a talk BEFORE Graham decided to share all:

        "At first I was cautious about what to give you, I honestly do not
        want to cause trouble for anyone, therefore, I was going to hold back
        on some of the sensitive revelations. That was until Mary lent me a
        video of you giving talks at Milton Keynes."

        I knew all of this from having read the book years ago. But when I
        make reference to this episode recorded in Confessions, people start
        asking me if I read the book and start alleging that I missed some
        things.

        Hey. I have a right to unplug from what I read just like you or
        anybody else does. This was Graham's experience that was recorded in
        Confessions. It wasn't Ford's experience. It isn't my experience. I
        am not going to plug into "Tom". As for the parts that were Ford's
        experience I don't see those in the same light as that of Graham's.
        Why is this so hard to understand?

        Nobody needs to defend "Confessions of a God Seeker", the book. It
        is what it is and will be what it will be for each person who reads
        it. I don't think people will all have the same impression whether it
        is a book by Ford, or whether a book by Eckankar.

        These are only recorded experiences that we are talking about. And
        when other people read books they are the witness and the interpreter.
        Not a machine running a program. This is my opinion.

        Etznab
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.