A quick look at a Law of One criticism.

So, I am, as I stated in the last article. Going to look at this video:

Youtube: Ryan Gable: Live, Law of One: RA, Love, Light and Litigation:

https://www.youtube.com/live/-zGwBzFPDnA?si=FYBw7odBi0N7tGb4

I must admit, that I started off really excited about this video. I wanted him to bring some sort of philosophical/ theological "meat" to the discussion. And me, being extremely well acquainted with the Law of One. Would be able to do that if I so chose.

I was disappointed though. Ryan gets hung up on something he reads in the Law of One session one with the contacts signature of "We are not of the love, we are not of the light, we are of the Law of One". 

Understanding the material: 

I know... EXACTLY what that means. David Wilcock once discussed it. It was taken out of the early books I believe. The three who were involved in it. Don, Carla and Jim, knew that this line could be incendiary. 

I won't go into what that means. It is kind of nuanced. It requires an explanation of their paradigm. I will say that my "signature" if I were to speak like this, in my view, would be "I am not of the Love, I am of the Light, I am not of the Law of One". People can only be one of the three. 

I went up to 56 minutes. But it just got too whiny for me to continue. And it seems like the entire foundation of his argument is built on this single, incorrect, point. (Although, as the Law of One says, there are no mistakes!)

I have several points here. One is that, yes, the people that follow the Law of One in a lot of cases cannot have these discussions. They cannot discuss or defend their points. It is apparently human nature that people have a kind of... I don't quite know how to describe it... Passivity. An inflexibility to even follow the guidance they have, in some cases, devoted their life to,  When I was trying to talk on the Law of One forums a few times in the last year. I wanted to make a passionate case against forgiveness without contrition. Making the case it is against free will. The Law of One's most prized law. And that the Law of One discussed the process including "Understanding, acceptance and forgiveness". That understanding alone can take more than a decade. Loads of specific arguments on this point. Some I have made elsewhere on this blog. 

I have also made arguments against leftism being legitimate under the Law of One. The idea of funding infinite migrants, which one of the women was putting to me as the more 'compassionate' choice. Is against the Law of One to not consider the places the taxes are coming from. Because are they also not 'One'?

Regardless of what you think about my specific arguments. My overall point is that the people in the Law of One forums and communities. Very rarely have any awareness of... well, any of it really. As far as I can tell. I posted about Law of One quotes all the time and people would argue against them. On reddit of course. The god is whatever that particular redditor feels is "fair". 

There are of course some people there that can quote the Law of One. Some that are following it in some small way and whose opinion I sometimes respect. But to make the argument that these followers are an indictment of the material does not track for me. Most Christians do not even slightly follow their own teachings and would be shocked by them. Very few atheists follow evolutionary psychology to any of it's natural conclusions. That are all opposite most of the leftist tenets. 

Most people, I would argue. Are just trying to find the best excuse for their own emotional preference. It's a kind of 'narcissism' to not have any values above oneself and ones own emotional preference. 

There are other points here I could make. I did go through making detailed notes on Ryans video. I could, I suppose, if I desired, attack his points more. But he wasn't really making strong points to my mind. Even though I don't like arguments along the lines of "Their heart was in the right place". I don't feel a bad intention here from Ryan. Even though I am very pro Law of One, I feel a little that Ryan is closer to my viewpoint on reality than a lot of people that investigate these things less. That ask no questions and have no skepticism. 

Final points: 

I will end on some final points though.

One: Many, many, many of Ryans repeated points seems to have come from David Wilcock. I might do additional blogs about how this one person has had a destructive effect by so brazenly attempting to take the Law of One for his own ends. While in practice ignoring it's teachings (like those on "transcience").

Two: One of these points is that at the end of book 5. The source is very specific that even people we are opposed to and might be negative in some manner. We are to see them in a compassionate light. Even sending love to such beings. This is very specifically stated at a few different points. Namely, session 67 and one of the last few fragments in book 5. But at many other points as well (once when Don asked where negative ET's came from the source answered "They come from the Creator, in the more shallow sense that you mean... ). It is something I have recently realised I need to learn because it is not something I have previously committed to. Despite familiarity with this material. 

I suppose I am happy that this post turned out less attacking than I had originally planned it!  

Three: I have some very practical benefits from the Law of One I wanted to highlight. Prayer, meditation, dream interpretation and affirmations are all things I use. All practical real world things. That massively improve my life. There are additional things as well.  

I don't intend to look any further into this guy.