12-15-2012, 02:20 PM
(12-14-2012, 10:22 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: I asked Jim this question...hear tonight's radio show if you're interested in his opinion regarding this topic.
Thanks for asking the question, Monica! It was framed a bit differently than I had in my mind, though I realize you were making a composite question based on the totality of the conversation.
I thought it was interesting that Jim's knee-jerk response was, "That's impossible!" but then proceeded to say it depended on the intention behind the sending. I think we all agree that the intention is key.
The point I have been attempting to make is that we don't always know what the totality of our intentions are. "New Age" circles are filled with people who have genuine green-ray activation, but who nevertheless get caught up in yellow/orange dynamics- hidden intentions, butthurt-ness, ego massaging, etc. And let me be clear that I am not holding myself out as an exception to this.
The problem lay wherein seekers are in denial of their own imbalances. On the surface, they project the appearance of "love and light" but underneath is a roiling sea of turbulent emotions and lack of self-acceptance.
It a nutshell: Unacknowledged yellow/orange influence = Unintended consequences.
I started this side-discussion by asking: Why not simply radiate love out in all directions, without attachments to a specific entities, in particular named negative entities?
This question still stands. And after all the debate I haven't seen anybody actually offer a good reason why we should send love energy to named negative entities, rather than radiating out in all directions without condition.
So at this point, unless somebody would like to come forward with reasoning as to why we would choose to place conditions and restrictions on our love, rather than offering it freely and without attachment, I will consider this discussion closed for my part. I have said what I had to say- anything more would just be repeating myself and going around in circles.
Thanks again for getting Jim's opinion in this topic.