06-03-2011, 01:25 PM
(06-03-2011, 12:58 PM)Azrael Wrote: I understand that, it was more the connotation of the wording that was negative and dismissive. And also the idea that the info was "borrowed" from the Ra material. I'm sure there are lots entities just as far in their evolution as Ra and I just think it's silly to consider the LOO material as any more of a "primary" source than any other.
it isnt silly to consider Ra material as primary source for assessing the reliability of any other information - ra material was channeled in a meticulous fashion. it isnt conscious channeling, it isnt a single person channeling, it isnt a few people channeling in front of an audience or anything like some other 'channels' (questionable) do.
the whole point of Ra material is, it is a reliable piece of information, which also relays some important mechanics.
the former and latter can both be used to assess reliability of other information. a piece of information conflicting with mechanics from a reliable source, especially when it doesnt give or explain any mechanics or reasons to explain the conflict, is questionable.
moreover what zen said is also true - many later sources borrowed a lot from Ra material. whether this is due to the principles behind the sources being the same, or, direct borrowing to prop up a piece of information, is a matter of debate for each channeling.