The above paragraph is benign to me. But the next one is disturbing: “Therefore , when life brings you challenges, difficulties and unique conditions, situations, and circumstances that are exactly suited to bring out the best in you, ‘judge not, and neither condemn,’ but be a light into the darkness, that you might know who you really are- and that all those whose lives you touch might know who they are as well, by the light of your example.”

The above would have been readily accepted by me when I was still a traditional religious person mindful of giving good example and having “sacrifice” and “struggle” as my daily bread. But after more than a year of Esther Hicks and George Sison I find the above jarring. Hicks especially convinced me that I can create my reality. Now Walsch has pointed out several unforeseen conditions. Maybe the conditions described by Walsch are what Hicks considers resistances that prevent manifestations. Don’t tell me this brings me back to square one!

“Therefore, all the people and events of your life – now or in the past- which seem to be ‘at odds’ with who you are and what you choose to experience, are simply gifts from the highest source, created for you and brought to you through the collaborative process of co-creating souls, allowing you to find yourself in a contextual field within which the fullest expression of who you really are becomes possible.”

“The divine purpose is to expand the reality of God.”

I am glad the challenges that seemed like darkness of the soul last June have been lifted, if only for awhile.

Esther Hicks wrote: “Through this process, you will return to your non-physical understanding, and then problems will cease to be problems and will be seen for what they really are -life -giving opportunities for eternal expansion.”

I say: God help me stay in my non-physical understanding!

 

Hicks wrote: “Those already in the non-physical [in the place of pure positive energy] can help humans. But if someone can help you to soften your resistance so that you can somehow be receptive to the love and well-being that’s being flowed, a little bit of alignment goes a long way.”

A good example is Wayne Dyer’s healing by John of God. “He… soothed your vibration or misalignment… therefore helped you to allow the vibration of alignment.”

In my case it is Jean Netario Cruz of the Magnetique fame who soothed my misalignment. The reason I still walk with a cane is because I have yet to experience her healing touch. I have been using her magnesium spray; my walking has improved greatly but I have yet to go to her Magnetique Center.

   “You are powerful creators… You’re not facers of reality. You’re creators of reality.”

“Most people do not realize that watching the violence and horrors of the world causes you to practice the vibration of it. And once you have practiced the vibration of it, you are going to rendezvous with more of it. And it doesn’t mean that you are going to immediately have that horrible experience, but it does mean that more experiences like that are going to come into your consciousness and that your sense of well-being will be numbed.” This is from Esther Hicks.

Nobody can say it as blatantly raw even crass as Esther Hicks. If the reader does not awaken to the situation with Esther Hicks’ statement, I don’t know what will.

“And we say we would be a selective sifter. We wold do our best to see our world through the eyes of Source – because Source is looking at the expansion. Source is looking at what is wanted.”

“The vibrational frequency of a question and the vibrational frequency of the answer are very different frequencies. Also the vibrational frequency of a problem and the solution are very different. So since Source is always with [the] solution frequency, when you are not, you are not going to feel good, and also you cannot receive inspiration from Source. You will, however, launch more rockets of desire, and good does come from that.”

“But it doesn’t have to be so hard.”

Rabbi Darfour has a less radical picture of God than Walsch, better than the God of the catechism but still not enough to answer my many questions.

The rabbi wrote: “Our actions testify to whether or not we experience divinity in our lives.”

“Defining God has always been a problem for theologians, philosophers, all of us. In the twelfth century, Judaism’s leading philosopher. Moises Maimonides, also struggled with this dilemma.”

“His solution was not only unique for its day, it also permanently shaped Jewish thinking. God, he wrote, can be defined only negatively. We cannot describe Gods essence by means of positive attributes, only negative ones, by what God is not. “

“Maimonides’ contribution to Jewish thought on the subject of God was significant and major. It helped those who believed in God to avoid the pitfall of ascribing to God essential characteristics that if accepted would inevitably create a logical conflict. How for example could we portray God as being simultaneously merciful and just. That is a contradiction in terms. Maimonides’ negative theology avoided the pitfall.”