Talk:2014-04-25-New Era Conversations 20

WARNING: Readers should be apprised of conflicting assessments of the document 2013-08-31-New Era Conversations 7 that cast doubt upon the integrity of the entire corpus emanating from its source. Otherwise, as for this particular missive, see below.

Rob wrote: Sun. May 4, 2014 at 10:15amCT

Sensing a decline of interest arising from growing incredulty, Michael of Nebadon appears to bolster the reliance upon extrinsic authority before a most revealing statement attributed to Charles, a Mighty Messenger, speaks unequivocally -

There are certain protocols involved in our work; they have nothing to do with morality or ethics, but have to do with protocols and best ways to proceed. (1)

The history of this world, even recent history recorded in writing allows discerning individuals to see clearly where actions devoid of morality and ethics lead!

May 4, 2014

Rob wrote on tml: Sun, May 4, 2014 at 10:28 AM

The desperation of NeoCons willing to consciously jettison morality and ethics become vivid.

Michael McCray wrote on tml: Sun, May 4, 2014 at 11:39 AM

Rob, Just because I don't think Putin can be trusted please don't use the term neocon to describe me, I do not trust G, Bush, or Dick Chaney either. The problem with using titles is they may line up in one respect and be totally off in 999 others.

Marty Greenhut wrote on tml: Sun, May 4, 2014 at 2:07 PM

Michael, Thank you for this post to tml. It gives me the chance to raise some questions that have been on my mind. I Too wonder why there are protocols that disallow ethical or moral considerations. It does not seem possible to me that love, truth beauty, and goodness can be excepted from our spiritual overcontrol except by Godless Luciferians, Satanic cultists, or just thoughtless mortal ignorance.

I have been wondering how this world can come under the correcting time protocols without first adjudicating the Illuminati who run things in gross corruption and intentional oppressive slavery; economic as well as mindal and spiritual. They hung Jesus on the cross and today are running Israel, the USA, and the UK.

Our governments are not trusted because THEY ARE NOT TRUSTWORTHY in any way. Does Teacher Charles expect the "channeling" of political and social reformation procedures to correct the problems we have in Israel/Palestine, in poverty VS Massive wealth, In the racism and bigotry in which we have been trained and conditioned like Pavlov's dogs?

If the cataclysms precede the planetary correction, can we expect the collapse of the Luciferian control over our world?

George Bush, Putin, Cheney, Obama, Netanyahu and all the warring leaders of our world are either committed Illuminati or are forced to do their work.

And, what of the zero point technology discovered by Tesla? Will we be able to receive our electricity freely which is universally present energy?

I am questioning the entire teaching that has been coming through Daniel because there has been absolutely no recognition of the oppressive Godless social realities under which we live. Any response whatsoever will be more than welcome either from you, Teacher Charles, Daniel or Roxanne. I am asking Rob to enter these questions into the discussion pages of the Daynal Scriptorium.

Thank you all. In Father's love, Marty

Rob wrote on tml: Sun, May 4, 2014 at 4:00 PM

Hello Michael-

Thank you for sharing your thoughts!

Neoconservatives do not have a monopoly on using amorality as protocols of conquest though readers of Daniel and Ron's political thought attributed to an Avonal Son and staff would think such is the preference of divinity. Such misconceptions are simply part of the legacy of Lucifer destined to disappear.

Gratefully,

Rob

Rob wrote on tml: Sun, May 4, 2014 at 4:35 PM

Hello Marty-

Thank you for sharing your thoughts! I look forward to any replies from those who constitute the team responsible for this literature to further clarify for unsuspecting readers the character of its composition. As ever, I will record the exchanges in the record's discussion page. For any who wish to contribute but remain anonymous, let it be known in your post so your identity will not be used in the record.

Gratefully,

Rob

Rob wrote to the Advisory Board and tml: Sun, May 4, 2014 at 8:31 PM

Dear Friends,

Today, I have begun to make some changes in the structure of what is known as The Teaching Mission Dialogues.

1) The first is to assign a more vivid flag for questionable material.

2) Remove the icon associated with the Dialogues from such material.

3) Replace it one offering graphic reference to suspected disinformation.

4) Finally, for search purposes​, ​the Dialogues category tag will no longer find these dubious​ files in the Dialogues though these records will be found under the name(s) of ​the responsible individuals.

This is a beginning of a much larger initiative to more prominently feature literature whose contribution to spiritual education is based upon intrinsic merit and not extrinsic authority.[1] Naturally, I welcome your comments as they are most important to the ongoing task of building a planetary corpus of literature emblematic of advancing God-consciousness through the various epochs the heart of which is the Teaching Mission Dialogues representing so well the eternal dialogue of humanity and divinity.

Gratefully,

Rob

1. The First Sutra - All spiritual teachings must be evaluated by their content, and not followed or rejected because of the celebrity of their supposed source. The time is long past on this planet when religion can be promulgated by asserting the authority of the teacher...it must be the teachings themselves and the effect they have on the students' lives, and not the claimed authority of their source that must be the final determinant in evaluating any religious teachings. - Will

May 5, 2014

Roxanne wrote on tml: Mon, May 5, 2014 at 1:20 AM

And who gets to determine which files are "questionable" or "dubious?" Do we have three Ancients of Days on our editorial staff?

Why not trust each reader to use their Spirit of Truth and their Thought Adjuster to guide them in evaluating each transcript for themselves? That's what we are here for, to make decisions, decisions and more decisions. If certain individuals attempt to make those decisions for others, it robs them of the experience of making their own decisions about what is true and what is not and growing their soul in the process.

There are no infallible mortals on our list that can be trusted to make correct evaluations for anyone else. Too many biased individuals poison the pot with their incorrect opinions and prejudices. I do not find these dialogues representing the "eternal dialogue of humanity and divinity," but of a few individuals trying to indoctrinate others with their intolerant opinions of other TRs, groups and sometimes even of celestial beings. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Roxanne

Rob wrote on tml: Mon, May 5, 2014 at 9:48 AM

Hello Roxanne-

You ask the cardinal question that must be addressed by those tasked with maintaining the record for historical purposes allowing each to discern for themselves if such decisions are in error..

If you do not find "these dialogues representing the "eternal dialogue of humanity and divinity," but of a few individuals trying to indoctrinate others with their intolerant opinions of other TRs, groups and sometimes even of celestial beings" perhaps you will cease to produce them. However, try as you may, there is not a thought in a any of our minds that is not composed by the admixture of humanity and divinity. Both are integral to the value we are giving to the realization of destiny.

For my part, I see them all as attempts by humanity to represent divinity, and the record of human history shows such an endeavor is a mixed bag of treasures and tricks.

Gratefully,

Rob

Michelle wrote on tml: Mon, May 5, 2014 at 1:28 PM

Dear Rob,

If everyone who has a doubt about a certain TR or a certain transcript were to do with it as you want to do, then there would be several sites that mark up as "questionable" certain tr's and transcripts- but they'd all be marking up different transcripts from different TR's. Isn't this doing the same as all religions of the past have done? Blessing only certain passages that the leaders personally view as true? Kind of reminds me of the way the Bible was put together... only certain gospels were chosen. Kind of reminds me of how Christianity broke up into different sects as well. This is all just more acts of separation, of personal judgement against others' beliefs and experiences. It's all the same mistake Rob...

I've had to fight my own tendency to dismiss certain TR's too! If something doesn't resonate with me, the tendency is to dismiss. But, truth is, there have been portions of every TR's transcripts that at times did not resonate with me. Still, I would rather read them than not because there is always something in it that will resonate and help me grow in spirit and love.

When will we learn to just love and support one another's paths to God regardless of specific beliefs and experiences? It's the only way this world will ever reach light and life. Light and life cannot be built through the use of yet more separation. Haven't we seen this enough through history? Time and again "leaders" deciding what will be acceptable in a religion and what will be discarded? When you discard someone's experiences and beliefs, you discard the person themselves as well. This always fails to unite the world because it is just more separation! We should love one another and appreciate each person who is trying from their heart to reach God regardless of their specific experiences which are personal and just as real as any other.

Well, that's my own 2 cents on this subject....

Much love :), Mich

Michelle Duchemin

Rob wrote on tml: Mon, May 5, 2014 at 2:03 PM

Hello Michelle-

It is good to hear from you again! If nothing else has been accomplished by this recent decision, hearing from you and Roxanne will have been worth it.

As for Daniels' work in general, it has little if anything to do with religion as it is focused on the development of material infrastructure serving economic and political development. Charles has said it best "there are certain protocols involved in our work; they have nothing to do with morality or ethics".

This editorial decision has to do with assessing the value of purely journalistic comments that are found to be in error of material fact(s) while supporting of partisan politics and is subject to change.

Gratefully,

Rob