~Speaking of Seth~

Seth/Jane Roberts Public Boards: All posts are visible to the www => Seth Related Questions / Explanations => Topic started by: Deb on November 17, 2021, 04:36:06 PM

Title: Christ was a common name
Post by: Deb on November 17, 2021, 04:36:06 PM
Is it just me, or does this bother anyone else?

"It was the Jewish tradition that nourished the new religion in its early stages. 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." (In Chapter 20 of Seth Speaks, see Session 586 for July 24, 1971.)  —TMA Session Eleven: September 15, 1980

Although catholicism did not stick with me, I do remember this much: Christ was not Jesus's name, it was his title, meaning the anointed or chosen one. His name was Jesus (in Hebrew Yeshua). Which I imagine WAS a common name at the time. Even is to this day.

But why would Seth call Jesus "Christ" and say it was a common name? Shouldn't he know better? For that matter, shouldn't Jane and Rob?

It really bugs me. I should take a look at Mary's book comparison of Seth Speaks, Rob's transcripts vs. what was actually published. It could have been something the Amber-Allen editors changed on their own.
Title: Re: Christ was a common name
Post by: LarryH on November 18, 2021, 07:45:36 AM
Quote from: Deb on November 17, 2021, 04:36:06 PMIs it just me, or does this bother anyone else?

Not just you. It bothers me too.
Title: Re: Christ was a common name
Post by: barrie on November 27, 2021, 03:13:34 AM
Quote from: Deb on November 17, 2021, 04:36:06 PMChrist, as you know, was a common name

Deb, I cannot find Seth saying this or anything like it anywhere in Seth Speaks or within it in Session 586.

But I think I figured it out.

In "Magical Approach, "Session 11, 11-15-80," Seth DID say, "Christ, as you know, was a common name..." BUT in context, I believe he was saying that there were many men being referred to as Christ at that time...and Seth KNEW "Christ" was not a name.

In context, in the next paragraph, Seth says: "As I stated before, that part of the world was filled with would be messiahs, self proclaimed prophets, and so forth, and in those terms it was only a matter oftime before man's great spiritual and psychic desires illuminated and filled up that psychological landscape, filling the prepared psychological patterns with a new urgency and intent. There were many throw away messiahs (with gentle amusement)—men whose circumstances, characteristics, and abilities were almost (musically) the ones needed—who almost (musically) filled the psychic bill, but who were unfitted for other reasons: They were of the wrong race, or their timing was off. Their intersection with space and time did not mesh with the requirements."

Barrie Comments: It makes sense to me that many of these "would be messiahs, self proclaimed prophets... throw away messiahs" would have been referred to as Christ, meaning the "anointed or chosen one." 

The following is why I also believe Seth KNEW, "Christ" was NOT a name:

Seth refers the reader to Seth Speaks in comments in Magical Approach. In Seth Speaks, there are various places, at which Seth refers to "Christ" as a "thing" (my word).

For example: In Session 560, Seth says, "This does not mean that A CHRIST has appeared within each system of reality."

You don't say that about a name. You wouldn't say, "This does not mean that A DEB has appeared within each system..."

You WOULD say, "This does not mean that DEB has appeared within each system..."

Also, in Seth Speaks, he makes other "title" references. For example, he refers to "THE Christ Entity.'

He doesn't refer to other entities in the that manner. For example, he doesn't say, "The Ruburt entity." He would say, "Ruburt's entity." Note,, he doesn't say, "Christ's entity"—as if Christ was just a name and not a title. But he says, "The Christ Entity."

With a title, you say "the." For example, if you are talking about a king...you would say, "the king's entity" and you would NOT say, "King's entity."

So, to me, it is clear that Seth knew Christ was not a name. And when he said, "Christ, as you know, was a common name..." – he meant that many people are around this time were referred to as Christ.
Title: Re: Christ was a common name
Post by: LarryH on November 27, 2021, 08:34:38 AM
Quote from: Deb quoting Seth on November 17, 2021, 04:36:06 PMChrist, as you know, was a common name, so when I say that there was a man named Christ involved in those events...

At least two of us serious Seth readers read that sentence in a way that gave us pause. If Seth did not mean what he clearly stated here, as Barrie shows, then that statement could have been worded in a less misleading manner.
Title: Re: Christ was a common name
Post by: Deb on November 27, 2021, 09:38:44 AM
Quote from: barrie on November 27, 2021, 03:13:34 AMDeb, I cannot find Seth saying this or anything like it anywhere in Seth Speaks or within it in Session 586.

But I think I figured it out.

In "Magical Approach, "Session 11, 11-15-80," Seth DID say, "Christ, as you know, was a common name..." BUT in context, I believe he was saying that there were many men being referred to as Christ at that time...and Seth KNEW "Christ" was not a name.

Yes, you're right, it's from Magical Approach. I had seen the mention of Seth Speaks in the quote and for some reason I put that in. A brain f*rt. I should have just quoted directly from the search engine. I fixed that in my first post here.

"Jewish shepherds represented the placenta that was meant to be discarded, for it was Jewish tradition that nourished the new religion in its early stages before its birth. 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."
—TMA Session Eleven: September 15, 1980

Thanks Barrie for the explanation of what Seth meant. But it still bothers me. :) Seth was always so accurate, poetic and clever in his use of language. To me it would be like him saying "as you know, Mister is a common name." Or something similar. I'm also surprised that Rob, Jane or an editor didn't catch that. I'm hoping that it was a mistake in Rob's note taking since he was neither raised Catholic like Jane, nor a pope in a past life like Seth (as far as I know). Even my former in-laws, who were Jewish, were fond of telling me that "Jesus" was a Jew. Not that I've ever been religious. Seth does refer to him in other places as either Jesus or Christ.

I did look at Mary's comparison of Rob's transcript to the published version, and in this case they match.

Title: Re: Christ was a common name
Post by: barrie on November 27, 2021, 10:16:43 PM
Quote from: LarryH on November 27, 2021, 08:34:38 AMcould have been worded in a less misleading manner
Hi Larry H and Deb,

To me, it was not misleading at all. I took it to mean just what I said. Not many people know too much or care about Jesus or Christ...and to say "it was a common name" when talking about all the many Christs and false martyrs walking around--was very sensible.

Out of context it may seem odd...but to me, anyway, in context, it was not odd or disappointing at all...especially when in context Seth referred the "the Christ Entity" which implies a title--like if you say "the King's entity" and not "King's entity" as if you were talking about a person. 

Also, at the time, if Jane or Rob thought that Seth actually literally meant "name" -- I think they would have said something. So, I believe they also took it the way I am taking it.

As far as I can, Seth never said "Christ's entity" but always said "the Christ entity" -- and I went thru all of his works.

Title: Re: Christ was a common name
Post by: strangerthings on December 11, 2021, 08:05:18 PM
Hey just adding my two cents... In my metaphysical studies and in my religious studies and secret societies studies and blah blah blah studies and research I've come to learn that the word "Christ" is the title given to people who were "awake" or somesuch thing like that. In layman terms it means "the anointed one ".

Seth says Christ is the inner self.

So my thinking right now this moment is that people were called something to this effect when the inner self was the immediate self.

I'm just throwing mud on the wall lol
Title: Re: Christ was a common name
Post by: DylansDad on December 11, 2021, 09:13:10 PM
Yes, I think Seth is spouting rubbish here. Christ is a title, the anointed one. It was not a name like Tom, Dick or Harry. What I fear about Seth is that falsehoods may be intertwined with real wisdom and it is up to us to discern one from the other. I have studied a lot of Bibilical modern historical scholars and no one thinks CHRIST was a common name nor a common title. It would be like calling everyone Prince Joe, Princess Maude, Prince Jack, etc. Those titles were reserved.  Now for all we know, there were deranged people running around calling themselves the Queen of Shiba or Messiah of the world, but to assume this was common, rather than an anomaly, seems very odd to me.  I do not look for ways to rationalize Seth because his validity isn't important to me. I study Seth, but if he says something I find absurd, I just let it go.  How about the Seth quote where he tells Rob that Jane will NEVER have arthritis? I almost included it in my SETH CLIFF NOTES, but thought it would rub New Agers the wrong way, since so many of them are paranoid about anything negative (I do not know how they navigate life here and now).
Title: Re: Christ was a common name
Post by: barrie on December 12, 2021, 01:35:37 AM
Quote from: DylansDad on December 11, 2021, 09:13:10 PMYes, I think Seth is spouting rubbish here. Christ is a title, the anointed one. It was not a name like Tom, Dick or Harry. What I fear about Seth is that falsehoods may be intertwined with real wisdom and it is up to us to discern one from the other. I have studied a lot of Bibilical modern historical scholars and no one thinks CHRIST was a common name nor a common title. It would be like calling everyone Prince Joe, Princess Maude, Prince Jack, etc. Those titles were reserved.  Now for all we know, there were deranged people running around calling themselves the Queen of Shiba or Messiah of the world, but to assume this was common, rather than an anomaly, seems very odd to me.  I do not look for ways to rationalize Seth because his validity isn't important to me. I study Seth, but if he says something I find absurd, I just let it go.  How about the Seth quote where he tells Rob that Jane will NEVER have arthritis? I almost included it in my SETH CLIFF NOTES, but thought it would rub New Agers the wrong way, since so many of them are paranoid about anything negative (I do not know how they navigate life here and now).

DD Writes: Yes, I think Seth is spouting rubbish here. Christ is a title, the anointed one. It was not a name like Tom, Dick or Harry.

Barrie Responds: This whole thing is a MAJOR nonissue. I understood what Seth meant right from the start. He KNOWS it is not a name. If you look thru the totality of the work, as I did he ONLY refers to THE CHRIST entity. He NEVER says, CHRIST'S entity—as you would say about a person with that name.

For example, referring to Martin Luther King, you would say KING'S entity.

But referring to an actual KING, someone with the TITLE of KING, you would say THE KING'S entity.

If someone was referring to a person named Will, we all would say WILL's entity...and not THE WILL'S entity.

Again, not ONCE did Seth say CHRIST'S ENTITY...but he ALWAYS said THE CHRIST entity.

Also, just for one more example. In Session 560, Seth says, "This does not mean that A CHRIST has appeared within each system of reality."

You don't say that about a name. You wouldn't say, "This does not mean that A JOE has appeared within each system..."

You WOULD say, "This does not mean that JOE has appeared within each system..."

So, all this should lay this whole speculative argument to rest...Seth NEVER treated "CHRIST" as a name.

That said, THIS is actually how I understood what Seth meant:

Yes, in Magical Approach, "Session 11, 11-15-80," Seth DID say, "Christ, as you know, was a common name..."

Barrie Comments: BUT in context and in effect, besides ALWAYS saying "THE Christ entity," as I will show in the next paragraphs, it is clear to me that Seth was saying that there were many men being referred to as Christ at that time...and Seth KNEW "Christ" was not a name.

In context, in the next paragraph in Magical Approach, Seth says: "As I stated before, that part of the world was filled with would be messiahs, self proclaimed prophets, and so forth, and in those terms it was only a matter of time before man's great spiritual and psychic desires illuminated and filled up that psychological landscape, filling the prepared psychological patterns with a new urgency and intent. There were many throw away messiahs (with gentle amusement)—men whose circumstances, characteristics, and abilities were almost (musically) the ones needed—who almost (musically) filled the psychic bill, but who were unfitted for other reasons: They were of the wrong race, or their timing was off. Their intersection with space and time did not mesh with the requirements."

Barrie Comments: It makes sense to me that many of these "would be messiahs, self proclaimed prophets... throw away messiahs" would have been referred to as Christ, meaning the "anointed or chosen one."
 
OR, in other words, their believers in the populace, would have "named" them Christs...in much the same way, as an analogy, people today refer to the "fake Seths" as Seth. These "fake Christs" were referred to as "Christ" – each one believed to be the "anointed one."

DD Writes: What I fear about Seth is that falsehoods may be intertwined with real wisdom and it is up to us to discern one from the other.

Barrie Responds: Yes, this what you fear based on your beliefs about Seth...including this erroneous belief, to me, that Seth didn't actually know that Christ was a title. That said, I believe that NO ONE should accept anything Seth says just BECAUSE Seth said it. As Seth himself has repeatedly said, and as I agree and have repeatedly said: TRUST YOURSELF FIRST.  Accept what rings true to you and throw away the rest or put it aside for further thought at another time.

DD Writes: I have studied a lot of Bibilical modern historical scholars and no one thinks CHRIST was a common name nor a common title. It would be like calling everyone Prince Joe, Princess Maude, Prince Jack, etc. Those titles were reserved. 

Barrie Responds: I have already addressed this above. Seth's EVERY mention speaks of "THE CHRIST ENTITY," and never does Seth says "CHRIST'S ENTITY." Seth knew it was a title.

DD Writes: Now for all we know, there were deranged people running around calling themselves the Queen of Shiba or Messiah of the world, but to assume this was common, rather than an anomaly, seems very odd to me.

Barrie Responds: Well, believe Seth or not, and as I stated above Seth did say that here were MANY people running around calling themselves things that would have caused those who believed them to refer to them as "Christ"—the anointed one.

Seth (Session 11, 11-15-80): "As I stated before, that part of the world was filled with would be messiahs, self proclaimed prophets, and so forth, and in those terms it was only a matter of time before man's great spiritual and psychic desires illuminated and filled up that psychological landscape..."

DD Writes: I do not look for ways to rationalize Seth because his validity isn't important to me. I study Seth, but if he says something I find absurd, I just let it go.

Barrie Comments:  First, let me say, speaking for myself, I not looking for ways to rationalize, making up excuses for or overlooking anything. I am speaking of FACTS—and the FACT is that Seth ALWAYS said THE CHRIST entity—proving that he knew it was NOT a name—but a title...as well as the other info and explanations I gave above.

Second, the idea of Seth saying something "absurd" to me is absurd because I have never found such things. Also, I would think that it is much MORE likely a possibility that I am misunderstanding something...as opposed to Seth suddenly saying something that was absurd. This is me. So, IF I found something I believed absurd...THEN I would FIRST do some research on what was said—and compare it with what else was said elsewhere in the material—and also include re-examining my original understanding or misunderstanding.

But I would not simply let it go—because letting it go--leaves out all of the follow-up study and contemplation to figure out IF it was actually absurd or not.

And THAT said, as far as I'm concerned, everyone is free to believe ANYTHING that Seth says is absurd...if that is what they feel...but I would suggest some follow-up research if possible.

Now, MANY people see MANY of Seth's ideas as absurd—but these cannot really be researched. Seth says we are dead right now as we'll ever be, time is simultaneous, infinite dream and probable realities never end, we create our own reality, there are no accidents...and on on on. MANY people would say these or some of these things are absurd...and that is correct for them according to THEIR belief systems.

But THESE things can't actually be "proven" by examining the material and what Seth said...but the issue if Seth really thought that Christ was a name...can be disproved by looking at the material.

DD Writes: How about the Seth quote where he tells Rob that Jane will NEVER have arthritis?

Barrie Responds: IF Seth made a conjecture about the future...that didn't occur...I would not call that "absurd." I would call it a good example of how you can't really predict the future because it is fluid...and people have free will to make any choices along the way "getting to that future" which can counter any prediction. All future predictions are simply what is believed to be the most PROBABLE future give all the beliefs IN THAT MOMENT that the prediction was made. So, I wouldn't refer to this whole issue as involving absurdity or not.

And THAT said, to ME, it is ASTOUNDING IF in ALL of the Seth-Jane-Rob work over 21 years and so many official books, early and personal sessions books, and class transcripts—ONLY less than a handful of "errors" or mistakes can be found.

Seth said that he not infallible but the material he gave Jane was as free from distortion as is possible from his dimension to ours—and that was because of his relationship with Jane and Rob.

Seth (Session 47; CAPS originally underlined): "Truth contains no distortions, and this material with all my best efforts, and with yours (Rob & Jane), of necessity must contain distortions merely in order to make itself exist at all on your plane. I will never condone an attitude in which either you or Ruburt maintain that you hold undiluted truth through these sessions. Any material, to exist on your plane, must to some extent done the attire of your plane, and in the very entry to your plane it must be somewhat distorted. I must use phrases with which your minds are somewhat familiar. I must use Ruburt's subconscious to some degree. If I did not take advantage of your own camouflage system, then YOU would not be able to understand the material at this time. Inner data, even this, MUST make its entry through some distortion. We must always work together, but you must never consider me as an INFALLIBLE source. This material is more valid than any material possible on your plane, but it is nevertheless to some degree conditioned by the camouflage attributes of the plane."

Seth (Session 513; CAPS ADDED FOR EMPHASIS): In these communications, therefore, Ruburt's consciousness expands, and yet focuses in a different dimension, a dimension between his reality and mine, a field relatively free of distraction. Here I impress certain concepts upon him, with his permission and assent. They are not neutral, in that all knowledge or information bears the stamp of the personality who holds it or passes it on. Ruburt makes his verbal knowledge available for our use, and quite automatically the two of us together cause the various words that will be spoken. Disortions can occur, as any information can be distorted. We are used to working together now, however, and THE DISTORTIONS ARE VERY FEW.

Seth (ESP Class, 2-26-74): Class Transcript: Class started to relate to Jane, and discuss what Seth had said, when he returned abruptly:

Seth: "Now, excuse me – I have a point I forgot to make."

Class Member:  "You forgot?"

Seth:  "I forgot!... I never made any pretense at infallibility, and were it not for my quite fallible emotional reality, you would not relate to me at all! ...

"Now, infallible Seth, very fallibly, will return you to your fallible self – if I have your permission...

"I return you then to the true infallibility which is the infallibility of your beings, the infallibility of your strength, the infallibility of your inner knowledge. You sit before me and your energy is unassailable, and it is indeed infallible and it is your right. Let yourselves not be robbed of it through your beliefs."

Barrie Comments: And my beliefs about TRUSTING YOURSELF over me, Seth, DD and EVERYONE:

(from) Barrie Gellis' Seth Presentation ": HOW DEEPLY EMBEDDED IN THE SETH MATERIAL IS THE CONCEPT OF NOT HURTING AND ACTUALLY HELPING OTHERS? (11-10-09)

"First, I'd like to state what I hope will always be
one major ground rule
That I believe is key to everything,
Which, of course, includes the Seth material,

And it is this:

"In any discussion or presentation of the type I am about to give,
Or any type:

"In the end, TRUST yourselves first and foremost over everyone else—
Listen to what others say, listen to what I say, listen to what Seth says--
And then TRUST and listen to your SELF as you assess it all
And hold onto whatever rings true deep down inside you,
And throw away or put on hold—everything else.

 
"Allow me to add one more thing:
Be brave in questioning yourself
Be brave in delving within.

Be prepared to find answers and new questions
You never dreamed possible
Or that may even scare you.
You are always giving messages to yourself
If you have the willingness to listen...

"One of the bravest things you can do, in my opinion,
Is to take these inner journeys of self-awareness
Part of which is to examine what you believe and why
In light of your new experiences
Which includes what happens every day,
And what happens here today.

"And THEN, of course, to TRUST yourself,
Which means to be willing to modify, change, or
Hold onto more firmly—
Any beliefs which come into play."


Seth Video (Seth Class 6-4-74): "The message is given in different terms, and you give the message to yourselves, for you are the message. The medium is not the message – you are the message. If only we can show you yourselves enough, then you will TRUST yourselves enough to explore those dimensions of your own greater reality that no one else can ever know or ever explore.

"There are journeys of consciousness that no one can take but you, and yet as you take them, you take steps in other terms for others, and you leave marks for your brothers and sisters to follow in their own explorations – cards that say, "I have been here. The place is safe. I leave you a sign of peace."

"Your BEING, alone, is important and has validity beyond any philosophy. THAT is the message that you are trying to give to yourself. You are each trying to rediscover for yourselves, in your terms now, after centuries of myths and distortions, the validity of your own beings. I ask you not to TRUST the validity of MY being, which is none of your concern, but to TRUST the validity of YOUR being, which is very much of your concern."  











Title: Re: Christ was a common name
Post by: strangerthings on December 12, 2021, 06:07:59 PM
Truly love that the knowledge Seth speaks is always leading you back to you.

"you are the one you have been waiting for all of your life."
(Byron Katie)

Our very own love story of loving Self.

Our own soap opera lol

We, are the myth. 😊