“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

In the Old Testament, you did what you were told to by the almighty. If he told you to slay your son upon a mountaintop, then it was up to you to obey, and to your son to acquiesce. God’s words were not to be taken lightly.

There was not to be any argument given. Obedience was man’s largest responsibility to the Godhead of the Old Testament.

Now Ruburt’s paper was largely correct, in that Christianity in general, and the Catholic Church in particular, has not only frowned on revelation, but in the past tried with the utmost effort to strike it down. This was largely out of self-interest, and the many Protestant faiths are a proof of the fragmentation that results when man is given some freedom to interpret his relationship with God himself.

You could not have a cohesive society based upon the validity of private revelation, when you believed in a God who was so bloodthirsty, and who demanded such proofs of obedience.

Now God at the last moment might stay your hand—but then he might not. Divinely inspired crimes could only be acceptable against the enemies of organized Christendom, or against its own subservients. Thus of course was a certain amount of prejudiced order maintained (almost sarcastically).

(9:35.) Give us a moment.... Christ, as you understand him historically to be, spoke in parables and symbols. Men often took him literally, but his message was that the spirit of God was within each person—in terms of the symbolism, each person being a child of the father who dwelled in heaven. But heaven meant an inner reality for Christ, not an exterior one.

In the past, because of your God concepts, private revelations were indeed highly unwieldy. No common sense was applied to them. They were untinged by objectivity. They justified any act. This applied not only privately, however, but to the mass-accepted revelations of all religions, that could justify righteous wars for God’s sake, or justify murder in the name of peace.

The next, psychic family dream represented an actual reunion of some Sumari family members, so that Ruburt would not feel so alone, but realize he did indeed have rich emotional connections with others, at other levels, and that he was part of a family of creative initiators, full of energy and vigor, who could go out into the world or cheerfully forget it if they chose.

The dream meant, also, that he was not alone in a different fashion, for the self that he knows is supported by strong and vigorous other portions of the psyche, and other aspects all ready to help him—inner friends he can count upon.

The dream also represented the coming birth of new material, for the “family members” gave each other new information and bits of knowledge, so that this was also a reunion of portions of the psyche.

(“I guess not. I haven’t taken the time to think of any. Do you?” This was the first time I’d ever asked Seth if he had any questions we could answer. My little tactic didn’t work, though.)

(10:00 PM. Seth’s closing reference to a “sweet creature” was a reference to our sweet cat, Willy, who midway in the session had hopped up on the couch and snuggled himself tight against my left side as I took notes.)