Faith doesn't need proof, and you cannot prove it since he is created in the minds of humans.
So it is the work of their imagination. I knew it.
If that were so for all varieties of "spiritual" experience then you would be able to use "the work of their imagination" to provide an answer to the Problem of Seth's Origin:
http://www.rivier.edu/faculty/pcunningham/Research/Problem_of_Seths_Origin.pdfPresumably your explanation would fall under "hypnotic self-suggestion" and "high creativity", but these explanations do not adequately answer the Problem.
Sum that up if you want to make a post, I'm not reading that much text for no real purpose.
That is a published paper; you can read the abstract and conclusion.
The purpose is to show you a different perspective, and introduce you to substantial issues such as the Problem of Seth's Origin and related questions such as the "Content-Source Problem".
Do you have any links to video evidence of this Jane Roberts doing her thing? I did have a read through some of the paper, while it does claim some extraordinary things and makes some valid points, it doesn't seem to follow much of a scientific method. The fact that the majority of the material was transcribed by her husband instantly sets skeptical alarm bells off in my mind.
I am not familiar with this material; all I have is Cunningham's papers and a copy of
The Nature of Personal Reality which I did not even finish; also, I note that Jane Roberts is mentioned in Phoenix Journal #2.
If you are alarmed by the possibility of fraud, I suggest a read of the Eisenbeiss case where fraud was determined to be highly unlikely.
http://www.aeces.info/Top40/Cases_8-25/case24_soulmate.pdfThere is limited science because this paper is a phenomenological study.
[Phenomenology] is primarily a descriptive discipline and is undertaken in a way that is largely independent of scientific, including causal, explanations and accounts of the nature of experience. Topics discussed within the phenomenological tradition include [but are not limited to] the nature of intentionality, perception, time-consciousness, self-consciousness, awareness of the body and consciousness of others.
Of course, making a conclusion is difficult...
because of the content-source problem! Still, the Seth material is suggestive;
No academic psychologist, including Dr. Instream, will give you a statement to the effect that [Seth is] a survival personality. Dr. Instream will give a statement I believe, as to Robert and Jane's character, the quality of the Seth material, and the fact that no fraud of any kind is involved.
Not nearly as suggestive as the
Phoenix Journals though! I also like the Cosmic Awareness messages (mention is made in Journal #85).
Speaking of which, the emphasis here is mine:
Are you among the few who could read the messages from Cosmic Awareness [or any channeled source] and neither believe nor disbelieve, but use them to stimulate your thoughts and bring your own consciousness toward search and discovery for yourself?
) 
