Too Much Change: Do We Sink or Swim?
August 4, 2018
By Steve Beckow
Credit: CREW Marketing Partners
Matthew Ward once asked:
“An issue of great importance being considered by light-filled leaders is: How much shocking information can people assimilate before it starts wreaking havoc within the collective consciousness?” (1)
Shocking information obliges each of us to let into our personal view of the world things we never wanted to believe were included in it, like the genocide the Yemeni war is becoming, child sacrifice and Satanism in the Vatican, sexual slavery, pandemics, toxic vaccines, crops that bankrupt small farmers.
On and on the list goes of things we’d rather not see included in our view of the world.
This is bad enough. But it isn’t just “shocking information” that can disorient us. Even changes for the better can.
What we’re talking about is just too much change – any kind of change.
We can go two ways with it. We can get tired, burned out, exhausted, etc.
Or we can let go of all resistance and all sense of what we have to do, be and have. We can allow everything to be up for grabs. But that applies only to us.
If we shift our thinking onto the other person, to make the world work, I think we have to allow for the ultimate choice to be up to them.
Werner Erhard captured the situation when he said our suggestions need to be free – OK if the other takes them; OK if they don’t.
We’ll listen and weigh, but, in the end, the choice is ours (or theirs) and, I’d say, not open to judgment, criticism, or opposition.
Only if both – flowing in this time of change and allowing free will – are in place can we have world peace and human unity, I think.
Conversely, if we put both in place, I believe we’d achieve world peace and human unity. (2)
Most people want their freedom; some people prefer order, predictability, and security.
But in the end, the law of karma holds each of us fully responsible for all the choices we make and the actions we do in our lives. “Just following orders” doesn’t cut it with the lords of karma.
We just don’t consider things, I believe, from a deep enough level to see our ultimate responsibility in matters related to us. We agree as a group to allow the word “victim” to cover much more territory than the actual factual circumstances support.
We don’t dig deeply enough to uncover the steps we took to bring about the outcome – viewed from all angles (karma, reincarnation, pre-birth agreements, level of comprehension (ego, everyday self, Self, Higher Self, No-Self, etc.).
We know that continual change is guaranteed. One can’t go through Ascension without everything being turned topsy turvey.
Either we sink under the weight of it or we swim with the tide. Swimming with the tide means flowing with events.
I know the ultimate outcome (drowning in the Ocean of Love) but I fear the mid-range steps involved in getting from “here” to “there.”
So I myself am not going deeply enough into the whole dilemma to walk myself out of it.
I already know the way out. It’s simply a matter of consistently and continually putting it into practice.
The way out of the dilemma for me is to keep breathing love up from my heart, which restores me to a space of transformative love, in which there is, not simply no dilemmas, but no possibility of dilemma itself.
Footnotes
(1) Matthew’s Message, Feb. 14, 2010, at https://www.matthewbooks.com/el where
(2) If we suddenly found ourselves at a vibrational level where higher-dimensional, transformative love was flowing, we wouldn’t need to do anything at all. At that level no one would think or do another harm, to paraphrase Sir Thomas More. There would be no dilemma.
Source: Golden Age of Gaia
August 4, 2018
By Steve Beckow
Credit: CREW Marketing Partners
Matthew Ward once asked:
“An issue of great importance being considered by light-filled leaders is: How much shocking information can people assimilate before it starts wreaking havoc within the collective consciousness?” (1)
Shocking information obliges each of us to let into our personal view of the world things we never wanted to believe were included in it, like the genocide the Yemeni war is becoming, child sacrifice and Satanism in the Vatican, sexual slavery, pandemics, toxic vaccines, crops that bankrupt small farmers.
On and on the list goes of things we’d rather not see included in our view of the world.
This is bad enough. But it isn’t just “shocking information” that can disorient us. Even changes for the better can.
What we’re talking about is just too much change – any kind of change.
We can go two ways with it. We can get tired, burned out, exhausted, etc.
Or we can let go of all resistance and all sense of what we have to do, be and have. We can allow everything to be up for grabs. But that applies only to us.
If we shift our thinking onto the other person, to make the world work, I think we have to allow for the ultimate choice to be up to them.
Werner Erhard captured the situation when he said our suggestions need to be free – OK if the other takes them; OK if they don’t.
We’ll listen and weigh, but, in the end, the choice is ours (or theirs) and, I’d say, not open to judgment, criticism, or opposition.
Only if both – flowing in this time of change and allowing free will – are in place can we have world peace and human unity, I think.
Conversely, if we put both in place, I believe we’d achieve world peace and human unity. (2)
Most people want their freedom; some people prefer order, predictability, and security.
But in the end, the law of karma holds each of us fully responsible for all the choices we make and the actions we do in our lives. “Just following orders” doesn’t cut it with the lords of karma.
We just don’t consider things, I believe, from a deep enough level to see our ultimate responsibility in matters related to us. We agree as a group to allow the word “victim” to cover much more territory than the actual factual circumstances support.
We don’t dig deeply enough to uncover the steps we took to bring about the outcome – viewed from all angles (karma, reincarnation, pre-birth agreements, level of comprehension (ego, everyday self, Self, Higher Self, No-Self, etc.).
We know that continual change is guaranteed. One can’t go through Ascension without everything being turned topsy turvey.
Either we sink under the weight of it or we swim with the tide. Swimming with the tide means flowing with events.
I know the ultimate outcome (drowning in the Ocean of Love) but I fear the mid-range steps involved in getting from “here” to “there.”
So I myself am not going deeply enough into the whole dilemma to walk myself out of it.
I already know the way out. It’s simply a matter of consistently and continually putting it into practice.
The way out of the dilemma for me is to keep breathing love up from my heart, which restores me to a space of transformative love, in which there is, not simply no dilemmas, but no possibility of dilemma itself.
Footnotes
(1) Matthew’s Message, Feb. 14, 2010, at https://www.matthewbooks.com/el where
(2) If we suddenly found ourselves at a vibrational level where higher-dimensional, transformative love was flowing, we wouldn’t need to do anything at all. At that level no one would think or do another harm, to paraphrase Sir Thomas More. There would be no dilemma.
Source: Golden Age of Gaia
Too Much Change: Do we Sink or Swim? | Steve Beckow
![Too Much Change: Do we Sink or Swim? | Steve Beckow]()
Reviewed by TerraZetzz
on
8/04/2018 11:52:00 AM
Rating:
