c0sm0nautt said:

The distinction is made because the vast majority of people currently on Earth identify with themselves (the ego) and others (as separate entities). In order to teach the Law of One, it is necessary to work within these conditions.

If you follow the discussion earlier in the thread, you'll see STO is better defined as STOS (service to the self and others - the greater whole/self), whereas STS is simply the service to ones own perceived being.

---

Diaboleros said:

c0sm0nautt said:

The distinction is made because the vast majority of people currently on Earth identify with themselves (the ego) and others (as separate entities). In order to teach the Law of One, it is necessary to work within these conditions.

If you follow the discussion earlier in the thread, you'll see STO is better defined as STOS (service to the self and others - the greater whole/self), whereas STS is simply the service to ones own perceived being.

---

STS is "simply" the service to ones own perceived being. How exactly can you not be of service to your own perceived being? Every single action you do, every single breath you take, is service to your self.

---

This is the differentiation you have failed to understand. When I say perceived self, I am referring to the idea that one would identify with the self of the mere physical/entity the ego mind perceives as self. This is STS. Whereas, the true self transcends the perceived ego-identified body/self to include all there is and ever will be, including other entities (and yourself!), thus STO. 

Diaboleros said:

Anyway, you have been succesfully tricked into worshipping a channeled material while you could have as well used your own mind and own logic. You just blindly copy beliefs without understanding them. You make statements without argumentation, you just said "in order to teach the law of one, it is necessary to work with these conditions". Being necessary doesn't explain why it is necessary, it doesn't explain the underlying logic.. because there isn't any.

---

I wouldn't quite equate asking for guidance during meditation with "worshiping." To the contrary of blindly copying beliefs, I've offered my own interpretation of the Law of One earlier in the thread. Just because you couldn't follow the logic doesn't mean there isn't any... If you can't see that the majority of the people on our planet identify solely with the ego mind... then I really don't know any other way to convey the idea. Why is Ra teaching the Law of One in the first place?

Diaboleros said:

You're like a puppet spreading misinformation because you have no faith in your own intellignce, you could as well channel Ra yourself. What is holding you back from doing so?

---

Ok if you say so, I'm a puppet with no confidence! Although everyone does have the capability to channel, it does taken a certain amount of prowess and technique (and natural ability to some extent) which I have not yet developed. I have no intention of channeling, my friends and family think I'm crazy enough. As far as channeling for myself, I've been attempting to make connections with intelligent infinity for almost two years with meditation and dreams.

Diaboleros said:

Lol every thought you think is a type of channeling. You are the highest form of intelligent energy in the whole universe. All secrets of the universe can be discovered in a dialogue between two people. Plato has proven this by making a slave proof the theorem of pythagoras. Worshipping your Ra material, going like omg I don't have such prowess or natural ability or technique is exactly what is blocking this process of discovery through dialogue between two people.

---

Diaboleros said:

Yeah thats the way I see it, you're channeling yourself. You're talking to yourself inside your head. Many people claim channeling is talking to aliens, but I doubt that, I believe channeling is accessing subconscious intelligence.

---