The EnlightenMeFree (EMF) Online Debate Forum

A pithy little critique of a common Ramtha teaching - by Andre Immelman.....

A brief critique of what RSE teaches, concerns the question of epistemology (the theoretical study of the way we come into possession of knowledge) - Ramtha makes this startling claim:

"Be open to truth regardless of its source. Let your feelings be your guide."
- Ramtha

If it is nothing more than our feelings that decide what is ‘truth’, then what are you going to do if two people experience different (and conflicting) feelings - if two versions of the same truth conflict - how does Ramtha the Wise propose to resolve such obvious difficulties? Right now, my own feelings are that Ramtha is either nothing more than the figment of the imagination of a desperately cruel and rapacious woman who has managed to hold out the promise of false hope to a desperately indiscriminate and undiscerning audience, or he is a demonic entity masquerading as an angel of light (Jhn 8:44 & 2Cor 11:14).

If our feelings determine truth, then my feelings are as valid as JZ Knight’s! Only, I don’t charge $1,350 for you to come and listen to my feelings!

We were told by Ramtha that we have monkey minds and can't possibly see reality. Never to trust feelings. Because its a program running. One has to be analogical in order to see what is. See what is, as it is. 7 levels of reality all different colors. If you raise frequency one level you can see shadow people. They make designs on the backs of cards. Sounds like Ramtha is stealing from Abraham Hicks. Wait, oh. No, she stole from Ramtha- according to Ramtha she used to be his student.

I loved when JZ told everyone to pick a date something bad was going to happen. Use your feelings, to see. June 15 was the average. Plus Jz had a machine she talks to dead people with, that said the same date, she said. Scared everyone. The pacific was going to eat us all up. Nothing happened. But yet somehow Jz is still gifted to these people. Its a circus. Entertainment.

Human kind has been trying to work out the conflicts of rationalism versus ojectivism since Plato.

I tend to side with ojectivism, believing there is a fundamental reality the exists independent of the observer. That does not preclude that we each percieve the same reality differently. Your thoughts doesn't change my reality when we are both percieve the same thing, albeit differently through our own mental filters. Thoughts do not create reality, but thoughts alter the perception of reality.

In short: C+E = R -> BS

Here are a few interesting refernces:
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/gue ... tum-world/

http://kazimskorner.blogspot.com/2007/0 ... ality.html

http://www.geek-central.gen.nz/peeves/o ... ality.html

The E-P-R Paradox:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox

Bell's Inequality:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Q ... ality.html