“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

John the Baptist, Christ, and Paul were all connected in the dream state, and John was well aware of Christ’s existence before Christ was born.

(My questions concerned relationships between the three personalities of the Christ entity: John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, and Paul. What sort of psychic interactions had taken place between them in any strong or exceptional way? Were their dreams and other psychic experiences — other than the recorded instances — outstanding on a regular basis as they lived out their lives day by day?

(Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist, was a cousin of Christ’s mother, Mary. John baptized Christ at the beginning of his ministry in A.D. 26 to 27, when he was about thirty. John was already active in his own ministry, and often called himself a “forerunner of one who would be nobler and stronger.” Shortly after he baptized Jesus, John was imprisoned by Herod Antipas in the fortress Machaerus, near the Dead Sea.

(It isn’t known for sure that Christ and Paul ever met. Paul was converted several years after Christ’s death; before that he had been a zealous persecutor of Christians. Nor does it appear that John and Paul met.

[...] See Chapter 21 of Seth Speaks for more on the Christ entity. According to history, Christ was crucified, and the other two members of Seth’s Christ entity, John the Baptist and St. Paul, were beheaded. [...] It would be interesting to get more data on the whole Christ question. As I told Jane after the session, Seth’s Christ material tonight reminded me of the idea of the Christ book, which Seth mentioned in Personal Reality.)

Christ dealt with myths, once again—potent ones that stood for inner realities. Christ clothed those realities in colorful stories geared to people’s understanding. I am using the name here, Christ, as one person for the sake of discussion, for that entity touched many lives, each leaping into a kind of super-reality as it joyfully played its part in the religious drama.

Now: the message of the Christ entity was, in religious terms “You are all children of God—the ‘sinner’ as well as the saint.” Indeed, according to the original Christ thesis, while a man could sin, no man was identified as a sinner. [...]

[...] Christ hoped to show that you survived death psychically and spiritually—that you “returned” to the father in heaven. [...] Christ well knew that that statement was indeed true, but men who condemned themselves, who considered themselves sinners, would not know what to ask for, except punishment to relieve their guilt. [...]

[...] For instance, in John 19 it is said that Christ carried his own cross; in Luke 23, Simon from Cyrene is named as carrying Christ’s cross for him. Many complicated questions and reasons have been advanced in dealing with various aspects of the Gospels: their possible foundation in oral tradition and older common literary or documentary sources; whether any of them embodies an eyewitness account of the life of Christ [it has been very recently claimed that Mark’s was written only a few years after Christ’s death, for example], whether the Gospels should simply be regarded as expressing a single tradition, the fact and atmosphere of Christ, regardless of anything else, etc.

Christ did not take part in it. (Pause.) There was a conspiracy in which Judas played a role, an attempt to make a martyr out of Christ. The man chosen was drugged — hence the necessity of helping him carry the cross (see Luke 23) — and he was told that he was the Christ.

The plea, “Peter, why hast thou forsaken me?” came from the man who believed he was Christ — the drugged version. [...] He knew of the conspiracy, and feared that the real Christ would be captured. Therefore he handed over to the authorities a man known to be a self-styled messiah — to save, not destroy, the life of the historical Christ.

Christ, the historical Christ, was not crucified…. [...]

The man called Christ was not crucified. [...] The whole concept of God the Father, as given by Christ, was indeed a “new testament.” The male image of God was used because of the sex orientation of the times, but beyond this the Christ personality said, “…the kingdom of God is within (among) you” (Luke 17:21).

[...] Some aspects of the Christ phenomenon were also explained. Then in the next session — which concerned other subjects — Seth unexpectedly added this aside: “You can have more material on Jerusalem or Christ now, or when you want it. You can have the Christ Book when you want it….” [...]

As I mentioned in Seth Speaks, the Christ entity was too great to be contained in any one man, or for that matter in any one time, so the man you think of as Christ was not crucified (See chapters Twenty-one and Twenty-two of Seth Speaks.)

Christ uses parables that were applicable then (as described in all four of the Gospels). He used priests as symbols of authority (Matthew 21:23–27). He turned water into wine (John 2:1–11), yet many who consider themselves quite holy ignore Christ at the wedding feast and think any alcoholic beverage degrading.

I’d say that in this 829th session Seth spoke out of a knowledge of biblical tradition and history; that is, he wasn’t saying that Christ did rise from the dead or ascend into heaven, but referring to Christianity’s interpretation of its own creative Christ story. Seth has always maintained that Christ wasn’t crucified to begin with — indeed, he told us in the same private session that “…in the facts of history, there was no crucifixion, resurrection, or ascension. In the terms of history, there was no biblical Christ. In the terms of the biblical drama (underlined), however, Christ was crucified.

[...] Christ, as you know, was a common name, so when I say that there was a man named Christ involved in those events, I do not mean to say that he was the biblical Christ. His life was one of those that were finally used to compose the composite image of the biblical Christ.” [...]

[...] Since Christ was presumably crucified around A.D. 30, this means that some 35–40 years passed before the advent of Mark’s account. [...] If time (as much as 40 days) did elapse between Christ’s resurrection and ascension, where was he physically during all of that period, other than on the few occasions cited in the Gospels and in Acts, when on various occasions he revealed himself to the women who discovered his empty tomb, to the apostles, and to some others? Sometimes Christ appeared as an apparition — but as Seth commented in a private session: “You could not have a world in which the newly risen dead mixed with the living. [...]

(Intently:) Again, Christ was not crucified. The historical Christ,³ as he is thought of, was a man illuminated by psychic realities, touched with the infinite realization that any one given individual was, by virtue of his or her existence, a contact between All That Is and mankind.

[...] His characteristics, for example, were seemingly quite different from those of the historical Christ. [...] Yet some exploits of his in his earlier life have been attributed to Christ — not as a young man, but earlier.

[...] When the historical Christ “died,” Paul was to implement the spiritual ideas in physical terms, to carry on. [...] He lingered after Christ, [just] as John the Baptist came before. [...]

John and the historical Christ each performed their roles and were satisfied that they had done so. Paul alone was left at the end unsatisfied, and so it is about his personality that the future Christ will form.

[...] Now these prophecies were given in terms of the current culture at that time, and therefore, while the stage has been set, the distortions are deplorable, for this Christ will not come at the end of your world as the prophecies have been maintaining.

Each of the twelve represented qualities of personality that belong to one individual, and Christ as you know him represented the inner self. The twelve, therefore, plus Christ as you know him (the one figure composed of the three) represented an individual earthly personality — the inner self — and twelve main characteristics connected with the egotistical self. As Christ was surrounded by the disciples, so the inner self is surrounded by these physically oriented characteristics, each drawn outward toward daily reality on the one hand, and yet orbiting the inner self.

(9:46.) Your Christ figure represents, symbolically, your idea of God and his relationships. There were three separate individuals whose history blended, and they became known collectively as Christ — hence many discrepancies in your records. [...]

[...] “Something like Christ being a central pole, with twelve balls revolving around him but radiating outward at the same time,” she said. “Christ created the twelve….”

[...] The crucifixion of Christ was a psychic, but not a physical event. [...]

[...] Christ, as you know, was a common name, so when I say that there was a man named Christ involved in those events (see Seth Speaks), I do not mean to say that he was the biblical Christ. His life was one of those lives that were finally used to compose the composite image of the biblical Christ.

Now: Christ was not crucified — therefore he did not resurrect, coming out of the tomb, nor did he then ascend into heaven. In the terms of the biblical drama (underlined), however, Christ was crucified.

[...] For I was embroiled in trying to produce a note relative to a passage of Seth’s in Mass Events about Christ’s resurrection and ascension. [...]

[...] (Pause.) Dogmatically, arising from the dead alone was clearly not sufficient, for men were to follow where Christ led. [...]

(10:37.) Christ tried to return man to nature. In a manner of speaking, again, there was no one Christ, historically speaking, but the personage of Christ, or the entity, was the reality from which the entire dramatic story emerged.

Both before and after “the time of Christ,” as historically given, there were men who claimed to be the messiah. [...] In a manner of speaking, now, it would make little difference which man was finally given the kingly robes—for the greater reality of the dream was so encompassing that it would come to be, whether one or 10 or 20 men’s lives were historically joined together to form the Christ. [...]

[...] It is said that there must be something, surely, to the story of Christ, since civilization was so altered. [...]

[...] If I say there was very little factual basis for Christianity’s beginning, then people will interpret this to mean that Christ’s reality had no basis in truth. [...]

([Florence:] “When I think of the millions and millions of lives that have been sacrificed in the name of Christ, in the name of God, the Jewish slaughtered back in the middle centuries with the—in the Crusades—in the name of Christ. You said the spirit of Christ had entered every person, and yet mankind does not reflect this. [...] Seth said before that there is not just one Christ, not just one person that did all the things that Christ did, but many people.”

[...] Now, you have been given the free will because the spirit of Christ is within you, this does not mean that you do not have free will. The spirit of Christ gives you the life to do with it what you choose. [...]

(Group discussed the concept of Christ.)

(Long pause at 9:55.) The Christ story in the beginning was not nearly as singular and neat as it might now seem, for the finally established official Christ figure was one settled upon from endless versions of a god-man, with which man’s psyche has long been involved: He was the psychic composite, the official Christ, carrying within his psychological personage echoes of old and new gods alike—a figure barely begun, comma, to be filled out in time, although originating outside of it (again, all very intently).

[...] Now the vision (in which Paul not only saw the light of Christ, but heard his voice) happened in the world of fact. It occurred—but Paul did not see, or communicate with (long pause), a person of divine heritage, sent by his father to earth, who lived the life of the official Christ, and who was crucified. Paul had a vision in response to the needs, desires, and dictates of his own psyche as it was connected to the world of his time, following the patterns of stories about Christ that he had heard that had begun to release within him a great yearning that was, in that vision, then, expressed.⁴

[...] The same applies to Christianity itself, for all of the seemingly historical events connected with the official (underlined) Christ did not happen in physical reality. [...]

[...] I didn’t know I’d get anything to do with Christ. [...]

Christ, as he is known historically, psychically represented man’s probabilities. [...] Because of Christ, there was an England — and an Industrial Revolution. The male aspects of Christ were the ones that Western civilization emphasized. [...]

Jane added that she might have read speculative matter involving Christ, the occult, and the Essenes; and probably, we thought many “secret teachings” have been attributed to Christ.

The church ignored Christ’s physical birth, for example, and made his mother an immaculate virgin, which meant that the consciousness of the species would for a longer time ignore its relationship with nature and its feminine aspects. [...]

[...] Christ, historically speaking, had altered that concept enough so that at least God the Father was not quite as capricious as Jehovah. [...]

[...] (To Ron): In a life in the east before the time of Christ, 1200 B.C., you were a member of a body of men who belonged to an esoteric heritage. [...]

(The Essenes were one of the four known Jewish sects active in the Holy Land at the time of Christ. [...]

[...] Baal worship appeared in Syria and Israel many centuries before the birth of Christ — as early as 1400 B.C., according to Syrian cuneiform texts. [...]

In your terms, and in your terms only, the coming of Christ was the Second Coming. [...]

[...] The three Christs material particularly affects him that way, for to deny the conventional idea of Christ is to antagonize not merely Catholicism but basic Christian belief. [...]

[...] In one of your own sessions at least encourage him to free associate, to say freely now what comes to mind regarding his feelings about the three Christs, and also ideas of the Anti-Christ. [...]

[...] One strong portion of him knows well that Christian theology is far from any entire answer, that Christ was not the son of the only God; the other portion of Ruburt is still affected by those beliefs, and he did not realize it.

He is afraid of taking on Christendom, and expects some poison pen letters because of the three Christs reference.

2. I underlined the word story (like this) in Seth’s material just to remind the reader that the Christ figure symbolizes our idea of God and his relationships. According to Seth, the man we call Jesus Christ was actually composed of three individuals who were the physical manifestations of the same nonphysical entity: John the Baptist, St. Paul, and a man historically known as Christ. [...] Seth discussed the Christ story in various passages in The Seth Material and Seth Speaks, and has at least touched upon it in all of his succeeding books.

[...] This is an often-heard sentence — and yet the main point of the Christ story² was not Christ’s death but his birth, and the often-stated proposition that each person was indeed “a child of the father.”

[...] Christ’s “father” was, however, the God who was indeed aware of every sparrow that fell, who knew of every creature’s existence, whatever its species or kind. The story of the shepherds and flocks comes much closer to Christ’s intent, where each creature looked out for the others.

[...] Here’s question number one: You said you’d tell us about the third Christ. Also, do we need to know more about the other two personalities belonging to the Christ entity: Christ Himself, and John the Baptist?”)

[...] Jane’s pace was quite slow.) The Christ entity was one. [...] The Christ entity had many reincarnations before the emergence of the Christ “personality” as known; as did the Buddha.

No — just the questions about the world religions, and those pertaining to the third Christ and allied subjects.

(10:21.) In any of these worlds, the Christ drama could never appear as it appeared within your own. [...] But Buddha, like Christ, interpreted what he almost knew in terms of your own reality. [...]

Christian dogma speaks of the ascension of Christ, implying of course a vertical ascent into the heavens, and the development of the soul is often discussed in terms of direction. [...]

[...] (Humorously): Christ could just as well have disappeared sideways.

[...] A Christ who was not aware of this would not appear in such a system, you see. [...]

The Christ drama is a case in point, where private and mass dreams were then projected outward into the historical context of time, and then reacted to in such a way that various people became exterior participants — but in a far larger mass dream that was then interpreted in the most literal of physical terms. [...]

(“I remember he — Seth — even helped me out with stuff on the Christ drama in there,” Jane said. [...]

There was a tie-in, and it’s that the Christ drama happened as a result of man’s dream, at least, of achieving brotherhood — a quiet, secure sense of consciousness, and a morality that would sustain him in the physical world.

The Christ drama did splash over into historical reality. [...]

The Christ drama is a case in point, where private and mass dreams were then projected outward into the historical context of time, and then reacted to in such a way that various people became exterior participants—but in a far larger mass dream that was then interpreted in the most literal of physical terms. [...]

(“I remember he—Seth—even helped me out with stuff on the Christ drama in there,” Jane said. [...]

There was a tie-in, and it’s that the Christ drama happened as a result of man’s dream, at least, of achieving brotherhood—a quiet, secure sense of consciousness, and a morality that would sustain him in the physical world.

The Christ drama did splash over into historical reality. [...]

[...] All the more since you have no particular conviction, anymore than Ruburt has, concerning the historic existence of a Christ.

The legend of Christ is of great psychic import however, and is intrinsically true. [...]

The character of Christ as it is portrayed is an excellent one, since it stressed human rather than specifically male qualities. [...]

The personality of Christ is an idealization, and a clue to the entity of which each individual personality is composed. [...]