Theos-Talk Archives (November 1997 Message tt00245)

Brenda S. Tucker wrote:
>
> I am aware of some statements in the I AM books that just doesn't seem to
> make sense,
> >considering what we know today. I am sure it is going to continue this
> way. The personality and
> >"programming" of the messenger is always going to interfere, to some
> degree, with the accuracy of the
> >message.
>
> Bjorn,
>
> This is so presumptuous. How arrogant! These people called daily for
> illumination to give it to you, and they called for your illumination as
> well as their own, and what do you do? You come out with a "they make
> mistakes" attitude. Couldn't the fault be your own? Who designated you God
> the All Knower? Why don't you give yourself time to ponder and figure out
> the meaning behind what they are trying to say?

Seems like a new case of misunderstanding between us. Perhaps you only read the beginning of my post
and reacted to it before you realized what I ws trying to say?
Let me assure you that I did not write this in the spirit of arrogance or "know-it-all-ness". I have a
deep sense of gratitude to those who have stood before the condemnation of the world and persisted in
delivering the message of truth and soul liberation throughout the ages. This includes HPB and the
Ballards, whom I believe were doing a tremendous service for the Brotherhood. Personally I feel that
the Presence of the masters is *more* powerful in the I AM books and the instructions given by the
Ballards are *more* useful for the spiritual seeker than just about anything I know of. I absolutely
do not have a "they made mistakes" attitude. I am NOT pointing the finger in accusation. But, they DID
make mistakes, and I think it is VERY important to be able to see this WITHOUT
condemning them or throwing out the child with the bath water.

I am trying to warn against idolatry - in both its "positive" and "negative" forms. Elevating the
messenger to godlike status - or - on the flip side - condemning him/her for this or that shortcoming
- seems to be a "natural" tendency of the human mind. The Christians have done it to Jesus, many
Buddhists to Buddha etc. etc. There are some negative consequences arising from this:
1. When the messenger is seen as infallible you have to adopt a very unthinking attitude - denying
your own faculty of discrimination whenever there is a discrepancy between your perception and the
messenger's words. Not exercising your own discrimination can be very dangerous. It can get you to
places you really wouldn't like to to go if you were in your "right mind". This is not a healthy
attitude.
2. IF you, in this state of mind, are confronted with some action or idea that the messenger
originates that you cannot "screen out" but have to accept as being "erroneous" or "bad", you may
switch to a near total condemnation of the messenger and all he/she stands for. This could be just as
bad as being totally accepting.

The Higher Self, or God if you will, in the person is perfect. That is true for all of us. But it is
also true for all of us, that, as long as we live in these physical bodies, we have tendencies and
traits that make our outer appearance less than perfect.

others who are showing us the way. The fact that their lower untransmuted personalities were capable
of making mistakes does not, in my opinion, diminish the value, or even sacredness of their service
and offering to humanity. On the contrary, the fact that they could make errors inspires me to strive
be ever vigilant - if they who were far more advanced on the path than I am could make mistakes,
sometimes even pretty obvious ones, then I'd better keep working on my own flaws every day until I
have graduated from the planes of relativity altogether.

The following quote by Lanello (Ascended) says it well:

> It is not wise to elevate even those who have the perfections of God when these are elevated from the standpoint of the human. Mankind have made idols of political figures and religious leaders–even of the true avatars. In each and every case when they have elevated the human and failed to apprehend the Christ and failed to become the Christ, they have come no closer to the real even when their attention has been upon the sons and daughters of God.

Another quote where I suspect the Theosophical Organization, among others, is being referred to:

> I believe that idolatry within the community or the movements of the ascended masters has in past activities caused schism and the downfall and eventual crumbling of the structure. It was true, beloved ones, in decades gone by in organizations sponsored by Saint Germain or El Morya or Kuthumi, that various individuals became as figureheads, seen as special or as having more power, more light, more spirituality. The more they were set apart, the more they played the part.
> And thus, though they might have made themselves kings,EN1 others rushed forward as kingmakers. And therefore, the individual himself did not have fair opportunity to realize his potential almost anonymously as the monk in the robe would do, but was so required to perform that, without the natural unfoldment of the spiritual soul, the ego would come to the rescue of the soul and therefore perform and do its dance.
> I can tell you that this day the strength of these activities has greatly waned. Some do not even exist any longer because of a personality cult.