AC 469767 ~
I can understand where you are coming from. I've called Lotus out on certain things I have disagreed with. Sometimes we arrived at an understanding and sometimes the understanding was that we were going to simply differ on our beliefs.
Quoting: :)(:No, according to Lotus, she has no beliefs. Therefore, this sets people up in a lose-lose situation, for if you express YOUR beliefs, she shuts you down with "I have no beliefs." How can you agree to disagree if the subject is off the table to begin with?
At one point I was very angered by Lotus' approach. Then I noticed others were angered by my approach. I decided to then try to re-perceive Lotus' approach. A lot of what she says is multi-layered (I feel) and this style of communication, writing and other visuals, allows the "listener" to be the interpreter. Once I re-listened to Lotus' words I was able to see past the parts that would bother me and get to the heart of parts of her message. Those are the words I respond too.
Quoting: :)(:Yes, you respond, and then she comes back and tells you what root problems you have no matter how you have responded. See, she sets it up that if you say ANYTHING in response, she will contradict you because of course what you say is a belief, and she has none. Of course saying she has no beliefs is a belief in and of itself. She also states that "perceptions" are not based on reality, so anything you perceive is considered false to her. See? This is a manipulation that goes around in circles. She keeps the reader confused.
Her one saying, "Love without integrity is like an ocean without fish." What does she mean by the use of the word integrity? What does she mean by "love"? Isn't her definition, whatever it is, a personal perception and belief based on a subjective interpretation? She perceives and tells us she does not. I feel she pretends she is a computer with stock answers that take no amount of feeling or mental consideration of what something might mean to you or me. She lacks compassion and yet demands that we love unconditionally. She puts conditions on the way we live and love, so it is difficult to rectify her claim of being unconditional. Do you see that?
But I understand the other approach as well. And I see where you are coming from. I am not sure if my solution will be a solution for you. But I present it for you to try if you would like?
Quoting: :)(:I diligently tried to (for instance) pretend I was back two-thousand years ago and finding myself in first contact with Jesus. I thought, well, I would hardly understand him at first either, so I must give him the benefit of the doubt. He would tell stories and give examples to try and clarify himself, so let's see if Lotus does this. I suspended all judgments and read her posts as if I was a neophyte listening to Jesus. It became quite clear, as stated earlier, Lotus is into raising herself up as a Prophet and Paraclete, and not trying to really raise awareness of Truth. It's as if she wants to be considered a Master but doesn't need to feed the multitude "this time around".
Yes, I truly believe that there is love within everything. Sometimes this is so hard to see and even harder to share. But within, in that place of non-judgment, I continue to witness is everywhere :).
What I have gathered from interpreting many of Lotus' posts here and elsewhere is that Lotus believes God is All-That-IS. This, I keep at the front of my mind, when reading her posts.
So much love to you both, All, ONE!
O!
Quoting: :)(:Lotus continuously lists her accomplishments and says she is a voice for God (her Abba), saying she worked hard to get where she's at. I've worked very hard, too, and am still working hard to understand and be all that I can be. I'm sure you've very hard, too, Allie. Why, then, does God speak to her and not you?
I'm sure God does speak to you. Why don't you brag about it? Isn't that an ego thing, that Lotus also swears she doesn't have? Who cares if she is The ONE except somebody who is feeding her ego? When Jesus was asked who he was, he answered, "Who do YOU think I am?" He was indicating that our perceptions are what we work from. We use our own power to determine what something or someone MEANS to us. But Lotus tells us how to think and what to think, and that our feelings are not based on integrity or in reality so they are false.
How patronizing is that? Is this love with integrity? Especially if she really believes that God is ALL there IS? If she believes that God is ALL there IS, then she wouldn't have to glorify herself as THE ONE who has to get the message out. She'd encourage us to know that we ARE one with God, and to know that that we can speak directly to God as well, and that we can HEAR God, too. No need for a middle man as in the Pope or Ministers or Prophets. It's what Jesus told his people two-thousand years ago. To go within. Why would He say that if He was the only one who could hear and interpret God's words?
I understand your loyalty, your patience, your peace-making qualities, and especially your love, Allie. It is pure and quite refreshing. I like to think and feel for myself, because I think God is within us all, me included. And, I'm within God. God has not forsaken me. I am not a lost soul. I am endowed with God's love, as are you...as is everybody. It is not exclusive. I think we definitely agree on this point. :-)
Thanks for listening..
