“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

What sin did the poor person or the sick person commit? [...] He tried to rise above the idea-systems of those times, yet even he had to use them, and so the connotations of sin and punishment distorted the message given.

[...] Most churches preach a dogma that stresses concepts of the sinful self, and sees man as a creature contaminated by original sin even before birth.

So do not think you are being spiritual when you are being long-faced, and do not think you are being spiritual when you berate yourself for your sins. [...]

(Seth discussed generalized sinful-self material in only one of the five private sessions Jane has held since she came through with the 931st session for Dreams three weeks ago.¹ In some respects lately she’s felt a bit more at ease.²

[...] Involved here also is Jane’s sinful self and “its” attitude concerning the requests she receives to go public through radio and television interviews, lectures, records, tapes, and so forth. [...]

[...] Of that last total, she devoted 13 sessions to material on the magical approach to reality, and 27 to the subject of the sinful self. [...]

Now: Churchmen of the Middle Ages could draw diagrams of various portions of the human body that were afflicted as the result of indulging in particular sins. Logical minds at one time found those diagrams quite convincing, and patients with certain afflictions in certain areas of the body would confess to having committed the various sins that were involved. [...] A man might be born deformed or sickly because of the sins of his father.

Illness was suffered, was sent by God to purge the soul, to cleanse the body, to punish the sinner, or simply to teach man his place by keeping him from the sins of pride. [...]

[...] Some believe that suffering is a punishment sent by God for past or present sins, or even omissions, while other religious schools insist that suffering is sent by God as evidence of his particular love for the individual involved: “God must love you very much, because he sent you so much suffering.” [...]

[...] The idea is supposed to be that suffering is good for the soul, is a way of atoning for one’s sins, and in some fashion the implication is made that such suffering in this life will be more than compensated for in heaven.

[...] anyhow, he did a terrific session then on the Sinful Self.... [...]

[...] The statements of the Sinful Self show him clearly the reasons why he was afraid of pursuing the unknown, and afraid therefore of using his own natural abilities freely and safely. [...]

([Gert:] “Then there is, according to present-day interpretation, no need for baptism to remove this so-called original sin?”)

There was no original sin to remove. [...]

[...] No sense of original sin, however, is implied. [...]

[...] In the first of the two he remarked that “Ruburt is still dealing with spin-off material following or resulting from his sinful-self data….” [...]

[...] hope was tempered even as my fear lessened, for she hadn’t mentioned outright the integration of a more understanding sinful self into her psyche. [...]

[...] (I’ve shown in Dreams that many of her physical symptoms have resulted from conflicts between those spontaneous urges, and entrenched beliefs that revolve around her sinful self and tell her that such activity is wrong.)

“Ruburt is still dealing with spinoff material following or resulting from his sinful-self data,” Seth said, “and this material generally follows the lines of development that are fairly obvious in the poems and notes [he has written] since that time.

[...] You are not born through any sin, either original sin or Freudian sin. [...]

[...] I still want to know what role the sinful self—to use the appellation Seth gave us—plays in all of this, for I’m more convinced than ever that it is still the dominant force behind all of it. [...]

[...] I reminded Jane that I was interested in sinful-self material above all else. [...]

In actuality, the combination of a philosophical stress upon discipline, physical and mental, with the belief in the sinful self, often brings about the most unfortunate human dilemmas. [...]

In the past some religious groups have also promoted beliefs that illness is a sign of God’s punishment, or vengeance for sins committed against his “goodness.”

Some individuals become anxious and worried if they think they are too happy — for to them it means that they are not paying sufficiently for their sins. [...]

[...] It was considered the sin of sins. [...]

[...] Again and again, I thought of resistance, of the sinful self putting up roadblocks, no matter what the consequences. [...]

[...] Not a word from Seth about why she’s been so miserable for the past five days, or why her decubiti are worse, or my suggestion that she go back into the hospital, or the role the sinful self plays in all of this. [...]

It is very important that your readers also do not latch upon “you make your own reality” in such a way that they reinforce old beliefs about poor self-worth, sin, or iniquity. [...]

[...] The ideas of shame are simply new versions of old religious concepts, or of scientific ones: if there is something physically wrong with you, it is either a sign of inner sin or of incompetency in terms of survival of the fittest. [...]

[...] The fundamentalists would rather believe in man’s inherent sinful nature, for at least their belief system provides for a framework in which he can be saved. [...] The vast social structures of Christianity were instead based upon man’s “sinful” nature — not the organizations and structures that might allow him to become good, or to obtain the goodness that Christ quite clearly perceived man already possessed.

[...] An avalanche or a flood or an earthquake will not be seen as a natural act of the earth’s natural creativity, but instead as a punishment from God for sin.

[...] Curse your ignorance, and search for evidence of man’s sinful nature. And many who do not believe in religion per se certainly believe in man’s sinful nature—though perhaps giving it a more scientific name. [...]