Although many people have written about the evils of television, I felt I had something to contribute to the discussion. You can find my new article here.
Atlantis Redux
A few years ago, I started to write a series of articles on Atlantis. I have finally completed that series; you can find the first article here:
http://www.thelighthouseonline.com/articles/atlantis.html
The topics are how Atlantis developed (very briefly), Atlantean technology and society, and how and why Atlantis ended. I hope you enjoy the series!
There is a lot more information that I could write, but the articles as they stand give a good overview without overburdening you with words.
A Message to Humanity
I received this message at 11:11 pm Pacific time on September 27, 2007. The message ended at 11:15 pm.
We have a message for all of humanity.
Rejoice and draw near
The angels have heard your cries
The God and Goddesses of old draw nigh
We bring succor and comfort to all who are stout of heart and resolved to do good no matter what
Find your favorite activity and do it with all your heart, and fear not, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Amen
And so it is forever and ever, Amen.
Praise the light
Praise Love
Be glad in your hearts, for God truly loves you all
Amen
Enjoying the Gods and Goddesses Deck
My latest article is available for viewing at http://www.thelighthouseonline.com/articles/light_and_shadow.html. Using a deck of cards called the Gods and Goddesses deck, I was instructed by my spirit friends to create a game that helps you find out more about yourself in a fast and fun way. Enjoy!
Recognizing the Truth
In searching for another topic entirely, I came across the definition of the new term, fisking, which means to take apart someone’s argument point by point.
Any well-educated person will recognize that this technique has been around for many thousands of years longer than the new name for it. It used to be called rhetoric. But perhaps the term Rhetoric has fallen out of favor because it has gotten a bad name; nowadays, I only hear the term used contemptuously, dismissively, meaning that whatever is being labeled “rhetoric” is hollow, meaningless, with no real power of conviction or persuasion. Pretty much the opposite of what it used to mean, in fact.
Intrigued, I pursued a few links and ran aground at one Web site where there was a bit of a flurry over the fact that Robert Fisk himself was quoted as stating that he never used the Internet (“I have to be honest,” he said, “I don’t use the Internet,” it having become “a hate machine for a lot of people”), not even email, he said, and yet, one commenter at that Web site pointed out that in an article that predated that statement by two years, Mr. Fisk had spoken of having received an email. The Web log writer then stated that Mr. Fisk said that email was being forward to him.
My instant question to myself was, How are those emails being forwarded? Are they printed out and delivered as paper mail? Or are they forwarded by email? In any case, who reads that forwarded email? Mr. Fisk himself? Or does someone read them aloud to him? No matter what the answers are, he can’t truthfully say he doesn’t use email. Even if he reads printouts of email, or has someone read them to him, he is still using email.
Maybe in his mind, he has a very precise definition of what email is and isn’t (like Clinton’s definition of sex), and therefore he can with ease say he doesn’t use email since he doesn’t–what? Compose it? Read it on a monitor screen (if he has it printed out for him)? Or maybe he was just speaking carelessly, in which case one hopes he is more careful with his facts otherwise.
A Small Corner of Peace
Late last year I was in a room with a very large lamp made of Himalayan salt. The lamp had a soft, peaceful glow that seemed to emanate on more than the visible spectrum. I felt calm, safe, unhurried, and peaceful in that room. Intrigued, I looked into the subject.
If various sources are correct, Himalayan salt is mined in the Himalayans; its origin is from an eons-old ocean that dried up into a huge salt bed, which was then submerged under tons of earth so that it compressed into a very hard form of salt. Because the salt was laid down so long ago, it is free of modern pollutants. Because it was from an ancient ocean, it has the range of trace elements and minerals that natural sea salts have. (As a side note, normal table salt has had all but the sodium chloride removed from it and thus has very little to recommend its use.)
What to do with Criticism
Normally, when someone (let’s call them person A) says something about someone else (we’ll call this person B), our tedency is to believe it without questioning it. But this isn’t always the right thing to do.
The people listening need to examine the situation and the people involved to decide what is really going on. It is possible that what person A said has nothing to do with truth. But how does one determine this?
The formula for examining and evaluating such statements is that there are several things that could be the truth concerning what person A said about person B:
a. It could be a true and honest communication from A about B.
b. It could be person A’s misperceptions or misunderstandings based on any number of things: Just not looking at what is really going on, problems in person A’s communication ability (including problems in hearing what was really said), different beliefs about reality (“if you do that, that’s a sin!”), and so on.
c. It could be person A’s agenda, conscious or unconscious, getting in the way of person A’s ability to truly see or at least honestly state what is there, so that what is communicated has everything to do with the agenda and nothing to do with the truth, or has so little truth in it that it will take some digging to get to it. (An agenda is where a person has an ulterior motive for saying or doing something, such as to make themselves feel better by putting down or discrediting a person who threatens them. People with agendas are seldom utterly truthful; at the very best, what they say is incomplete and biased in favor of their agenda, and at worst is a complete lie)
Understanding Denial
People in denial often state their denials in this form: “I’m not ___” or “I do ___,” when in fact they are ___ or they don’t ___. For example, someone might say, “”I’m not the kind of person to find fault” when in fact they are always finding fault with others, or “I always tell the truth” when the truth is a rare thing coming from them. These statements often accompany the action they are denying. For example, someone might say, “I’m not the kind to find fault, but didn’t you think that Suzie’s dress was a bit lacking in taste for this event?”
The reason for this is often that they are in denial about that aspect of themselves; in fact, that is exactly what denial is: Saying that something isn’t so when it is, or saying something is so when it isn’t. And yet some healthier impulse urges them to state the denial as its opposite, giving them a chance to look at what is inside, and giving others a heads up about what is really going on. If others hear someone starting to say, “I’m not the sort to find fault, but….”, then they know that whatever follows is almost certainly the person finding fault with someone, and they also know that almost certainly finding fault is a characteristic of that person.