(03-16-2011, 07:21 PM)unity100 Wrote: firstly, there isnt talk about Carla in Ra material, but 'the instrument'. that talk is depersonified to an extent that almost makes Carla appear as if she was not a real person.
I was talking about Q'uo.
Criticizing the utility David's channellings on the basis of their content is sensible to me.
Comparing those channellings with the quality of the Ra Material is also sensible.
I don't think you can conclude that 100% of his channellings are useless or negative though just because they aren't as perfect as the Ra Material.
Also, David himself would agree with your criticisms of his channelled work, but he would still say there is value in them. I think this is a moderated and reasonable approach.
Perhaps you are only interested in 100% perfect sources but I don't think The Ra Material is 100% perfect either.
As far the thing about polarity, you might have a point, however I still think it would be a big mistake to lump everything David channels, writes, produces, into a lump of bad stuff.
Everything is a combination of good and bad. If the Ra Material is like 97% good, maybe David is 91% good, but 91% good is still a lot of good and value can be derived from it.
Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I'm sympathetic to your most recent post because it focuses on the material itself and I've had criticisms of David's channelled material also. David's channelling often focuses on info that the LOO-Ra would consider transient, it clearly involves a lot of David's self, and it suffers from detuning on several occasions - David usually being the first one to point it out when it happens.
Still, despite the downsides David's work still had a ton of good stuff and discernment is necessary to pick out the good from the bad. This applies to the Ra Material as well.