Jesus: “I am the Way.” What did he mean? | Steve Beckow

By Steve Beckow, March 19, 2022

(Golden Age of Gaia)

Centuries and centuries of religious warfare and persecution have centered around the claim that Jesus is the only way to God.

This conflict is based on Jesus’s statement that “I am the way, the truth, and the life.”

What did he mean by that and what did it come to mean?

The Arcturian group states:

“​’I’ is a sacred word that is God and not ego. When the master Jesus said ‘I am the way,’ he was referring to the Godhead within everyone and not just himself, a point that has been seriously misinterpreted over the ages.” (1)

Matthew Ward explains that the Christ is not the person Jesus, but the highest power in the universe.

“The man known as Jesus in the Bible would be the first to tell you how wrong the teaching is, that “accepting him as Lord and Savior’ is the way to ‘salvation,’ and he’d also tell you that believing that is not the same as ‘believing in Christ.’

“Christ is not a name—it means ‘being one with God.’ The Christed energy, or Christed light, is the highest power in the universe and it is eternally available to all as the ‘savior’ that can keep you from falling into darkness and committing acts considered ‘ungodly.’” (2)

The Arcturian Group expands on the mystical meaning of Jesus’ saying:

“’I am the Way, the Truth, and the Light.’ – words not spoken simply by and for the master Jesus, but words spoken by him in order to explain to those listening that ‘I’ is not a personal ‘I,’ but ‘I’ is the Divine – the one and only ‘I’ – your true identity. Since the Divine is all there is, it must also be your real Self – how else could you exist?

“’I’ is the name of the Divine and the words ‘I AM’ do not refer to one human being, but to the true essence of every being. ‘I’ is a sacred word. Throughout time and even now, there are those who through gross ignorance and ego, have misinterpreted this truth to mean that they in their humanhood were God.

“In this false sense of self they always proceed to set up rules and teachings for others with dire consequences if not obeyed. Their spiritually ignorant followers more often than not do experience dire consequences of some sort, for in their choice to follow these false prophets they willingly give away their power.” (4)

They explain the difference between Jesus the man and the Christ:

“Very few at that time were able to grasp the depth of his teachings. The masses were not yet spiritually evolved enough to fully comprehend the truths he taught and so instead, pinned truth to him personally, making him a ‘god.’ The un-evolved third dimensional mindset of separation interpreted the words ‘I AM’ as referring only to the messenger.

“Thus began the worship of the man while missing the message. In choosing to ignore I AM as being the truth about every man, the majority simply continued to live in an un-awakened state. This false teaching lingers yet today in many churches who under the guise of spirituality, continue to worship the messenger and miss the message.” (5)

As the Arcturian Group imply, Jesus had to couch his teachings in parables and code because of censorship by the ruling hierarchy, as Jesus himself tells us:

“Energetically, there was a collective consciousness that was veiled or closed by fear and thoughts of power. In the time when I lived, there was a strong hierarchy. That hierarchy kept everything and everyone – rich and poor, powerful and powerless, man and woman – separate and in their place. As a result, the energy of the soul, which is one of freedom and creativity, had difficulty flowing. I came to bring innovation, often feeling trapped in the reality of the time.

“I am telling you this because you are going through something very similar.” (3)

It’s ironic that Jesus was put to death because of the misunderstanding of his words’ meaning, as the Arcturian Group tell us:

“The one and only truth is ‘I AM,’ words for which the Master Jeshua was put to death by an un-awakened society unable to comprehend the true meaning of these sacred words.” (6)

Jesus gave his fullest explanation on An Hour with an Angel. I quote that discussion at length for its interest:

Steve Beckow: Jan Ruusbroec in the Middle Ages once described the Christ, and he said this.

“In this darkness an incomprehensible light is born and shines forth; this is the Son of God in whom a person becomes able to see and contemplate eternal life.” (10)

“It is Christ, the light of truth, who says, “See,” and it is through him that we are able to see, for he is the light of the Father, without which there is no light in heaven or on earth.”

Is that light indeed the Christ in its essential form?

Jesus: It is the Christed light, yes, you are correct. In its fullest form.

SB: All right, now, can you – It’d be such an important thing for me if you could discuss your relationship to that light. Were you embodying it in the fullest manner? Was that your role or mission? Or what was your relationship to the Christ?

J: That has always been the fullness of my mission, in whatever form I have taken. I am the light that burst forth. I am the light that came from the heart of One, from the heart of God. And my purpose in all this relationship was to simply ignite not only what has been referred to as Heaven and Earth, but far beyond.

If you look to my essence, dear friend, all you will see is light. That is all there is. And it can assume relationship, and after relationship it can assume various form. But it is – light was beyond the Christ light. Can you think of it as a tiering? It was an implosion, explosion of light, and it has never changed. And it will never change.

SB: And when you say, “I am the light,” who is “I am”? Are you speaking as Jesus, or are you speaking as the Christ, as the light?

J: No, I am speaking as the light.

SB: And is that something –

J: The light that then transfers into the Christ light, that then transfers into the being that you, sitting here this night, call Jesus. But you were asking about my essence.

SB: I am. Is that light that became the Christ, is that the Father?

J: Think of it as a replication of the Father. It did not take away from the Source. It just expanded it. It is part of the infinite extension of creation. It is not born the way you think. It is just an explosion of light, that is.

SB: And that is not the Holy Spirit you’re describing?

J: That is the feminine. And when that also explodes, it becomes the light. And I am that blend. (7)

How remarkable that a single sentence from Jesus would be misconstrued and prove the basis for warfare and the death of perhaps millions over the ages.

Hopefully the truth emerging, no more wars will be fought in the name of Jesus – or in anyone else’s name!

Footnotes

(1) “The Arcturian Group via Marilyn Raffaele, March 13, 2022,” at https://goldenageofgaia.com/2022/03/13/the-arcturian-group-via-marilyn-raffaele-march-13-2022/.

(2) Matthew’s Message for Nov. 17, 2005.

(3) “Jeshua: Inner Change is the Key,” via Pamela Kribbe, January 25, 2021, at https://goldenageofgaia.com/2021/01/25/jeshua-inner-change-is-the-key/.]

(4) “The Arcturian Group Message via Marilyn Raffaele: October 13, 2013” at http://goldenageofgaia.com/2013/10/the-arcturian-group-message-via-marilyn-raffaele-october-13-2013/.

(5) Arcturian Group, Dec, 20, 2018.)

(6) The Arcturian Group, channelled by Marilyn Raffaele. April 12, 2015. [http://www.onenessofall.com/newest.html http://www.onenessofall.com/newest.html.

(7) “Transcript of an Hour with an Angel, with Jesus, Jan. 16, 2012,” at http://goldenageofgaia.com/ascension-as-of-2012/the-masters-speak/transcript-of-an-hour-with-an-angel-with-jesus-jan-16-2012/.]

SB: Okay. … I have a question from myself, and one that I would like answered for myself, if you would. Jan Ruusbroec in the Middle Ages once described the Christ, and he said this.

“In this darkness an incomprehensible light is born and shines forth; this is the Son of God in whom a person becomes able to see and contemplate eternal life.”

“It is Christ, the light of truth, who says, “See,” and it is through him that we are able to see, for he is the light of the Father, without which there is no light in heaven or on earth.”

Is that light indeed the Christ in its essential form?

J: It is the Christed light, yes, you are correct. In its fullest form.

SB: All right, now, can you – It’d be such an important thing for me if you could discuss your relationship to that light. Were you embodying it in the fullest manner? Was that your role or mission? Or what was your relationship to the Christ?

J: That has always been the fullness of my mission, in whatever form I have taken. I am the light that burst forth. I am the light that came from the heart of One, from the heart of God. And my purpose in all this relationship was to simply ignite not only what has been referred to as Heaven and Earth, but far beyond.

If you look to my essence, dear friend, all you will see is light. That is all there is. And it can assume relationship, and after relationship it can assume various form. But it is – light was beyond the Christ light. Can you think of it as a tiering? It was an implosion, explosion of light, and it has never changed. And it will never change.

SB: And when you say, “I am the light,” who is “I am”? Are you speaking as Jesus, or are you speaking as the Christ, as the light?

J: No, I am speaking as the light.

SB: And is that something –

J: The light that then transfers into the Christ light, that then transfers into the being that you, sitting here this night, call Jesus. But you were asking about my essence.

SB: I am. Is that light that became the Christ, is that the Father?

J: Think of it as a replication of the Father. It did not take away from the Source. It just expanded it. It is part of the infinite extension of creation. It is not born the way you think. It is just an explosion of light, thatis.

SB: And that is not the Holy Spirit you’re describing?

J: That is the feminine. And when that also explodes, it becomes the light. And I am that blend.

SB: All right. Well, there’s definitely more for me to understand than I do at present because that is a very deep explanation, and not one that I certainly fully comprehend at this moment. But I thank you for –

J: It’s not what you expected.

SB: No, no, it’s not. No, of course, it isn’t, but then my view is simplistic. How can it be otherwise? I know that.

J: You are not a simple man. When you think of creation, when you think of all that is, the creation is more light. And that initial light that bursts forth is who I am. …

SB: Thank you. Could you comment, please, on the teaching that some people say that belief in you will remove all sin? Is that an accurate statement?

J: If you believe in me – and I am going to do this to you, Steve. I am going to turn on it again – I am going to say if you believe in me the way I believe in you, if you love me the way that I love you, the way that the Mother/Father loves you, the way that Sanat Kumara loves you, Archangel Michael loves you, if you love in that way, then there is no sin, because you are in alignment.

There is this belief that good people do bad things. That is not so. When you are in the truth of your being, your mind, your heart, your soul, and if you believe in love, then yes, anything, anything can be forgiven. But the biggest obstacle has always been the forgiveness of self, forgiveness of each other.

SB: Well, there are some who consider that there are levels of knowledge, from mystery to belief to thought to feeling, to actually touching something, and on up to an enlightened or natural knowing. And they say that belief is a low dimension of knowledge. If I simply believe in you as I believe in Visa or MasterCard or the government, so to speak, is that enough to –

J: No, of course not. That is like believing what you are watching on TV, or believing in what you see on the news.

What I am asking – and I invite you to believe in me the way that I believe in you – is to come to know me. The belief is the starting point, the faith is the starting point, but as you come to know me, you come to know all. As you touch me, you touch all. If you know and believe in me, then you are there, you are home. But we do not believe in the way that it is used colloquially or in these levels.

Because if there is a small child who only holds belief, if there is a man on Wall Street that only holds belief, or a shepherd in the Sudan, do I say no, because they have only believed? It is these ones that I feel very often the most attraction to appear to, so that they will have their belief confirmed.

So do not underestimate belief. But I mean it in the truest heart-sense of belief. I do not mean it unwittingly buying whatever is told to you. It is what you explore with your mind and your heart and your very core, and what seems to you to be beyond question. And therefore through that you come to know. It isn’t always through study. Or sometimes the study is directly with me.

SB: That’s very clear. It sounds to me that what you mean by believe in me is somewhat similar to what you mean by “Come to me.”

J: Yes.

SB: “Approach me, love me.” Is that correct?

J: That is correct. And it is an open invitation. …

SB: Can you talk to us about Nicodemus and your interaction with him? What was happening there at a deeper level than the words indicate, Lord?

J: It was a soul-to-soul conversation. It was an awakening of his being. It was a plea for belief in justice. It was an opportunity to shift some axis almost of power. That is what was taking place.

SB: And he was a member of the Pharisees, was he not?

J: Yes.

SB: So he was a member of the powers-that-be of that age and was taking a tremendous risk in talking to you, was he not?

J: He was taking a risk, but understand, he was also representative of a group. So it was not as great a risk as you might assume. You know the Pharisees did not care for me.

SB: Yes. [laugh] Yes.

J: But there was what appeared on the surface and then there were the true questions that we were asking one another. And it was his opportunity to shift and to become a very active supporter. And part of his question to me was, “Will you continue on this journey that you know is going to lead into trouble for you?” That was the real conversation, and what was the purpose of it. And it was about faith.

(“Transcript of an Hour with an Angel, with Jesus, Jan. 16, 2012,” at [http://goldenageofgaia.com/ascension-as-of-2012/the-masters-speak/transcript-of-an-hour-with-an-angel-with-jesus-jan-16-2012/ http://goldenageofgaia.com/ascension-as-of-2012/the-masters-speak/transcript-of-an-hour-with-an-angel-with-jesus-jan-16-2012/].)

”’Footnotes”’

(2) The Holy Spirit is known in Hinduism as the Divine Mother or Shakti. The difference between the Father and the Holy Spirit is the difference between the transcendental and the phenomenal or between stillness and silence and movement and sound. The Father is not masculine and the Mother is not feminine.

(3) Because it might put distance between him and other people. But was Jesus also just being modest?

(4) There are several distinct attitudes that most people adopt to relate to God – friend, child to parent, parent to child, lover, servant. Each attitude is adopted because it reflects the person’s own feeling state. I am a servant of God. Friend does not feel right. Lover does not, child, parent. Only servant feels right and to relate otherwise is uncomfortable for me, even though several readers have written in questioning my attitude.

(5) I am deliberately not referencing the providence of this quote to reduce the element of controversy. My interest is only in knowing the truth; not casting aspersions at another channel. Jesus could as well have said that the passage was correct as incorrect.

(6) Between 5 and 5 1/2, Jesus said last week: [http://goldenageofgaia.com/2012/01/transcript-of-an-hour-with-an-angel-with-jesus-jan-9-2012/ http://goldenageofgaia.com/2012/01/transcript-of-an-hour-with-an-angel-with-jesus-jan-9-2012/]

(7) To the reader who asked the question about who Jesus studied with in India: notice that Jesus answered your questions without me needing to ask it.

(8) “Imperator” is the first source I’m aware of who spoke clearly of these times. For more on his ministry, see “Imperator’s New Revelation” at [http://www.angelfire.com/space2/light11/nmh/imperator1.html http://www.angelfire.com/space2/light11/nmh/imperator1.html] Though an Old-Testament prophet, Imperator, in reality the prophet Malachi, bent the knee before Jesus as the one he ultimately reported to.

(9) Writes Michael Tymn:

“[Stainton] Moses continually asked for the earthly identifications of Imperator and the others. Imperator initially refused, informing Moses that revealing their earthly names would result in casting additional doubt on the validity of the messages. However, Imperator later revealed their names, advising Moses that they should not be mentioned in the book he would write.

“It was not until after Moses’s death that the identities were made public by A. W. Trethewy in a book,The Controls of Stainton Moses.Imperator was Malachias, the Old Testament prophet. Rector was Hippolytus and Doctor was Athenodorus. Imperator took directions from Preceptor, who was Elijah. Preceptor, in turn, communed directly with Jesus.

“Other communicators in the band of 49 included Daniel [Vates], Ezekiel, John the Baptist, [Theologus] (1) Solon, Plato, Aristotle, Seneca, Plotinus [Prudens], Alexander Achillini [Philosophus], Algazzali [Mentor], Kabbila, Chom, Said, Roophal, and Magus.” (Mike Tymn to Steve Beckow, E-mail, 15 March 2008.)

(10) John Ruusbroec in James A. Wiseman,John Ruusbroec. The Spiritual Espousals and Other Works.New York, etc.: Paulist Press, 1985, 22.

(11) Ibid., 74. (“Jesus on the Lost Years, the Holy Grail, Reincarnation and Much, Much More,” Dec. 24, 2013, at [http://goldenageofgaia.com/2013/12/jesus-on-the-lost-years-the-holy-grail-reincarnation-and-much-much-more/ http://goldenageofgaia.com/2013/12/jesus-on-the-lost-years-the-holy-grail-reincarnation-and-much-much-more/].)’