On Assessing Channels

No longer needed

From time to time, we have concerns about channeled messages and it becomes necessary to have another discussion about the subject. The latest is over the allegation that Ashtar does not speak through channelers at this moment. Archangel Michael told me in a personal reading on April 25, that Ashtar does indeed speak through channels. Let’s see if I can find his exact words:

“Ashtar gives interviews all the time. He is a very public figure and enjoys that publicity. [Chuckles.] He is very verbose. [Laughs] … [The allegation] is not an accurate statement. Ashtar himself has spoken to this. There have been many who have claimed to be speaking to Ashtar.

“So there is dissemination [i.e., Ashtar does speak to channels] and as you know he has not been prepared to ‘out’ anybody in particular. He is very cautious, shall we say, but he does like for people to know what is going on in his command and his realm, and even far beyond.”

Now I hasten to add that AA Michael was not offended by the allegation and has the highest regard for the channeler concerned. No, I’m not naming him because it isn’t about me making counter-allegations. Rather what I wanted to speak to more was our own way of being with discussions of this kind as “consumers” of channeled messages.

I ask Archangel Michael all the time for his guidance on channels and one thing I notice about him is that he’s very tolerant of … how shall I say it? … divergences among channelings. He’ll often say that such-and-such a message was not correct, but he still recommends continuing to post the channel. In cases where he doesn’t feel the channel is credible (period), I respond by not posting the channel; where he simply feels the message itself is off, I may not post that message but I’ll post others by the same channel.

For example, it has been claimed that negative reptilian undersea bases were recently destroyed. Archangel Michael said that happened quite some time ago. While the visions of the bases’ destruction were accurate, the time frame was off. But nonetheless he also said that the channel for this vision had many good things to say and encouraged me not to stop listening to him on the basis of one incident.

The point I want to make is to ask us to gently back away from our black-and-white discussions of matters like channeling. Instead of taking up our sword when one message comes through that we don’t like or think is untrue, I’d encourage us to reduce the passion and drama levels from the harsh strains of a mob to the sweet strains of a simple statement of preference.

I think we need to bring the temperature down generally in our reactions to things. I prefer the messages of SaLuSa. I don’t prefer the messages of this channel over here. But I’m not calling for that channel’s incarceration or the ripping up of his or her lightworker card.

Ashtar is aware that certain channels do not channel him and say they do. He told me so some years ago. But, as AAM and Ashtar himself say, he allows it to happen and shrugs it off. If he’s not offended, why should we be?

We’ll need to listen to channels a while longer if we want to hear from the likes of Archangel Michael, Sanat Kumara, St. Germaine, and Ashtar. That’s their preferred way of communicating with us. (1)

People over on BlogTalk Radio have been asking how to estimate whether a channel is credible or not. One man wanted “confidence” and “certainty,” but I’d remind you that it may not be possible to have either right now. The most we may be able to arrive at are grounds on which we can make a somewhat informed decision of whom we choose to listen to. What are those grounds?

We can assess the credibility of a channel by listening for improbabilities, implausibilities, impossibilities, contradictions and inconsistencies. This is what a judge does when he or she listens to testimony. On the basis of the presence of too many of these flaws, the judge feels fairly comfortable in deciding the testimony to be non-credible, on a balance of probabilities (that is, more likely than not).

The credible sources judged to be free of these flaws, I choose or prefer to listen to; those which are full of these flaws, I choose or prefer not to listen to. That’s as far as I want to take the matter.

Or we can listen to the language being used and estimate whether it indicates that the medium is channeling a Third-Dimensional source (usually his or her own mind), a Fourth-Dimensional source (usually an astral entity), or a Fifth-Dimensional or higher source.

I listen to Sanat Kumara and I hear sweetness and love and, on that basis, I say to myself I prefer to listen to that particular version of Sanat. I listen to another channeler supposedly quoting Sanat and I hear judgment and separativeness and I say to myself I prefer not to listen to that particular source. That may be as confident as I’m going to get, short of having psychic powers or some other way of reaching certainty.

Or, and this for me is the final test, I ask my inner voice to tell me whether I should be listening to a certain channel or not. I’m not asking my mind because my mind is tainted by vasanas and transferences, biases and judgments. I’m asking my soul, if you will. I usually get back a non-verbal positive or negative nudge. And I accept that as the truest indicator. On the basis of it, I decide which messages I prefer and which I don’t.

Right or wrong may not be something we can determine. We may only be able to say whom we prefer and whom we don’t.

So I’m asking us to downgrade our reactions to channels from the crusader stance of “Down with the Infidels!” to a simple preference, a leaning away from or towards. The final verdict is whether we’ll read them or not on a continuing basis, rather than on whether we’ll hang them from the highest tree.

I think we need to cool down as lightworkers and reject acting as a herd or mob. In my view, we need to wean ourselves from the self-righteousness that was so evident in us when we were fighting the cabal.

The cabal is dead and will not rise again. We know that from the channeled messages we read and I believe we could know that from no other source. That’s the value of listening to credible channeled messages.

Time now to become family again and not transfer our feuds against the cabal into the family. The prognosis is for clear weather ahead. The storm is over. We’ll have to sweep out the stables, yes. But the time of chaos, the time of troubles is all but over.


(1) See “How We Communicate with You” at

Print Friendly