I am writing this blog as an attempt to organize my thoughts on religion. My goal is to extract what is rational from the garbage heap of religious beliefs, and lay out this rational religion for all to see. I intend to write books on this topic, and this blog will consist of preliminary sketches. It is my basic assumption that rationality and religion can be reconciled, and furthermore that certain of the goals of religion are goals that any rational being should have. My goal is not to give final answers, as I do not think this is possible with this topic. Rather, I hope to stimulate people to figure things out for themselves. I hope to inspire religious people to be more rational, and rational people to be more religious.

  1. #1 by Terra on December 29, 2011 - 6:52 pm

    Hi, I’m glad I found this blog. I’m trying to get spiritual people to be very, very wary about believing the Ra material is genuine, and I’d like to get people’s various opinions about it. I emailed the authors today. If you’re interested in viewing and/or sharing the email I sent, please let me know!

    • #2 by antitheology on December 29, 2011 - 9:50 pm

      Yes, I would be interested in seeing that email. I am in an agnostic position right now as far as the Ra material goes. I’ve drawn immense inspiration from it, and I continue to accept many aspects of Ra’s philosophy, but I’m no longer in the position of simply accepting every statement in the document as true. I’d be interested in learning more about your project.

  2. #3 by Terra on December 29, 2011 - 10:21 pm

    Here’s a shorter version of the email (I left in only the lines I responded to.) It will be interesting to see if they respond.
    Subject line read: Ra Material and Homosexuality

    Dear authors,
    I have always been open to New Age philosophies, spirituality, and so-called “alternative” ways of looking at physical and spiritual reality. Indeed, I read the Seth materials as a young teen; am a medium, and I am now Wiccan. So, when I was reading the Ra material online, I was open to the idea that this was genuine communication, similar to the Seth material. In the following commentary, I respectfully give my honest reaction to your work.

    I have to say that even though I had not been convinced one way or the other of the genuineness of the Ra material, it was interesting, and at the very least, creative and thought-provoking. However, as a lesbian woman, I was interested to see whether homosexuality was dealt with, since it is a common state of being in our species. I was greatly disappointed, and even personally offended, by what I found. Here is the link I am referring to: http://www.lawofone.info/results.php?category=Miscellanea&subcategory=Homosexuality As authors, I hope that you can be open to the following assessment, as I had been open to considering your work. I will paste the text, and then give my comments in red text. [Since I can’t change font color here, I’ll use double brackets to show what I’d put in red for them.]

    Questioner: We have what seems to be an increasing number of entities incarnate here now who have what is called a homosexual orientation. Could you explain and expand upon that concept?
    Ra: I am Ra. Entities of this condition experience a great deal of distortion due to the fact that they have experienced many incarnations as biological male and as biological female. This would not suggest what you call homosexuality in an active phase were it not for the difficult vibratory condition of your planetary sphere. There is what you may call great aura infringement among your crowded urban areas in your more populous countries, [[The fact that it is presumed here that homosexuality is more common in urban/crowded areas reflects a general public misconception of (male) homosexuality common in the 1980s, unsurprisingly during the time in which the Ra material was written. as you call portions of your planetary surface. Under these conditions the confusions It was also widely believed that homosexuality was “confusion” about gender identity, which is totally false.]]will occur.

    Questioner: Why does density of population create these confusions?
    Ra: I am Ra. The bisexual reproductive urge has as its goal, not only the simple reproductive function, but more especially the desire to serve others being awakened by this activity.

    In an over-crowded situation where each mind/body/spirit complex is under constant bombardment from other-selves it is understandable that those who are especially sensitive would not feel the desire to be of service to otherselves. This would also increase the probability of a lack of desire or a blockage of the red ray reproductive energy.

    In an uncrowded atmosphere this same entity would, through the stimulus of feeling the solitude about it, then have much more desire to seek out someone to whom it may be of service thus regularizing the sexual reproductive function. [[Absolutely ridiculous and ignorant statement, and here’s why: The REALITY is that there are many, many, many homosexual people, all over the world, who live in remote areas…guess what? A lot of them are afraid to come out and accept their sexuality out of fear of either persecution, violence, or what “god” might do to them. The idea that homosexuality is developed in an individual because they are in a crowded environment is the kind of 1950s homophobic drivel that one would not be hearing from an enlightened entity.]]

    Questioner: Roughly how many previous incarnations would a male entity in this incarnation have had to have had in the past as a female to have a highly homosexual orientation in this incarnation? [[Final proof that the Ra material is the product of 1980s ignorance about homosexuality: Only MALE homosexuality is dealt with here! This is typical of society’s preoccupation with male sexuality having more significance in a society than that of females’, as lesbianism has historically been less threatening to society in patriarchal cultures — because female sexuality in general (gay or straight) is often not acknowledged.]]
    [I then sent them the following correction: “Correction! In one section, I wrote, Final proof that the Ra material is the product of 1980s ignorance about homosexuality: My apologies: This should read, “Final proof that the Ra material is from the mind of the channeller, and in this section it is shown in this display of 1980s ignorance about homosexuality” That makes more sense, I hope!”]

    I hope that you respond to this analysis. From your response, I will easily be able to assess how sincere you are in claiming to believe that this is more than just the imaginings of the chaneller. Mind you, I’m not accusing you all of fraud. But if you are believing this “enlightened” assessment of homosexuality that’s clearly based on out-dated, 1950s-style homophobia, then you’re deluding yourselves at the very best. And, logically, since THIS part is clearly from the mind of the reader rather than any enlightened entity, guess what that says about the rest?

    I will be posting this in a few places, to open up for discussion; but particularly on LGBT spirituality websites. Gay people read stuff too, you know. Get some education.

    In love and hope (that you look at yourselves honestly),


    That’s what I sent! I know that “Get some education” comment was a bit snippy-sounding. But, as high-density entities, they’ll be forgiving!

    Thanks for reading,

    • #4 by Terra on December 29, 2011 - 10:22 pm

      Whoops, this isn’t a shorter version after all…I ended up putting in the whole thing.

  3. #5 by Terra on December 29, 2011 - 10:27 pm

    Sorry…just wanted to clarify that this bit was also part of the email I sent them. I thought it might seem as though I was addressing you rather than the Ra authors!
    “I hope that you respond to this analysis. From your response, I will easily be able to assess how sincere you are in claiming to believe that this is more than just the imaginings of the chaneller. Mind you, I’m not accusing you all of fraud. But if you are believing this “enlightened” assessment of homosexuality that’s clearly based on out-dated, 1950s-style homophobia, then you’re deluding yourselves at the very best. And, logically, since THIS part is clearly from the mind of the reader rather than any enlightened entity, guess what that says about the rest?
    I will be posting this in a few places, to open up for discussion; but particularly on LGBT spirituality websites. Gay people read stuff too, you know. Get some education.
    In love and hope (that you look at yourselves honestly),


  4. #6 by antitheology on December 29, 2011 - 11:49 pm


    One of the reasons I stopped being a “True Believer” in the Ra material was that I felt that “appeal to authority” is not a sound basis for determining truth. I don’t want to just believe what somebody else tells me; I want to believe what I can see for myself to be true.

    When I adopted that position, I was faced with the task of evaluating Ra’s claims one by one, rather than just accepting or rejecting the system as a unit. I found that there were a large number of specific ideas whose truth I could see for myself. Now I believe that set of specific ideas, and I am agnostic about the rest of the claims in the Ra material.

    I have said on various occasions that I would still believe what I believe even if the Ra material were written by Carla and Jim over the course of a two-week acid binge. That’s because I don’t rely on the assumption that the Ra material was in fact communicated by a being called Ra. I rely only on what my own logic and my own intuitions can tell me about the universe.

    This is similar to how scientists operate. From the perspective of science, Isaac Newton was a real crazy dude. He was an avid student of occultism and alchemy. But scientists believe in Newtonian physics, because you can see that it’s true without placing any faith in Newton himself. Under this attitude about truth, it doesn’t matter who said it; all that matters is what was said.

    That said, if somebody has said a lot of true things before, that increases our estimated probability that the other things they say are also true. So you can’t completely ignore who is speaking, and their history of past credibility, when you evaluate a statement. So whenever the Ra material says something, even if I can’t see for myself that it’s true, the fact that the Ra material said it increases my *estimated probability* that it is true, by some degree. It is one of many considerations that I take into account in evaluating the claim.

    You can probably guess at this point that I don’t believe that homosexuality is a sexual dysfunction, like Ra says. I’ve thought about that passage before, when I was a True Believer in the Ra material, and it was troubling to me, because it was inconsistent with my existing beliefs about homosexuality (namely, that it is a healthy and natural sexual orientation).

    I am heterosexual, and I have many LGBTQetc. friends. I love them and accept them as they are. But I don’t have a deep understanding of LGBTQetc. sexuality, because I have not experienced it for myself. I don’t have a clearly defined belief system about these sexualities, because I don’t understand them.

    Am I absolutely certain that the Ra material is wrong in saying that homosexuality is a sexual dysfunction? No. I’m inclined to believe homosexual people when they explain what homosexuality is. So, I’m inclined to believe that the Ra material is wrong about this. But I also can’t discount the hypothesis entirely, when it came from a source that was right about so many other things.

    One has to take this within the more general context of my skepticism. I’m not absolutely certain of anything. There are assumptions that I work under in the course of operating in life and trying to achieve my goals; but there’s no belief I hold that I think couldn’t possibly be wrong. Why would I be absolutely certain of a particular perspective on homosexuality (a thing that I don’t understand) when I’m not absolutely certain in my judgments about things I understand very well?

    I’ve taken a lot of words to express that I am ignorant and confused about this topic. I certainly don’t want to change your mind about anything. But I gave my view, like you asked.

    As for L/L Research, I don’t think that you will get anywhere in trying to convince them that they are not channeling higher intelligences. This is what they’ve devoted their lives to, and I am quite sure that your criticisms will not make them stop. I am glad of this, too, because I think that on balance, their work is profoundly helpful to humanity.

    Love and light,

  5. #7 by Terra on December 30, 2011 - 4:07 pm

    Thanks so much for sharing your perspective, Nick! I think it is a valid and reasoned one. And like I said in my email to those authors, it’s not about an accusation of fraud, just about the true-believer type of mentality. My issue, I guess (in further reflection), is that people who read the Ra material with the true-believer mentality (where they believe every aspect of the material without question), will just serve to perpetuate old-fashioned thinking about LGBTQ folks. Well, there you have it, and again, thanks for sharing! I enjoy getting people’s various perspectives. This isn’t so much a project, as just little ol’ me looking to engage in discussion with other individuals who know what the Ra material is (I don’t know many people who do “in real life”!)

  6. #8 by antitheology on December 31, 2011 - 5:45 am


    That was a pleasingly balanced response. I think the concern you point out is definitely a valid one.


  7. #9 by zk on March 26, 2012 - 10:54 pm

    Hello all,
    I decided to get in on this discussion because I recently had a semi-hysterical breakdown of sorts regarding the very same passage in the Ra material, book II, we’re all talking about. I am a lesbian woman myself and have recently struggled with acceptance of myself as a valid worthwhile being in that regard. I did have the mentality of a “true believer” [unfortunately] when I was reading the Law of One books because it resonated so well with me on so many levels. Except one. But boy was it a BIG ONE. And, boy, did I struggle to explain away what they have said. I guess because I already had doubt in my own validity as a human being it simply crushed me (talk about “unintended” consequences, ey?). Because suddenly, here is this “source” that says such “enlightened” things that resonate with how I feel and what I “know” on the deepest level, and then proceeds to tell me that I am a walking “sexual impairment”, and that the only, so to speak salvation I can hope for (though “much more difficult”) is through love “of a nonsexual nature”. In their own prior material Ra states (if indeed it was TRULY Ra who was talking, or even if there really is SUCH A THING, because I saw them making mistakes constantly in other things, and then correcting themselves later, so I suppose it is possible that “most” of the material was transmitted unaltered ….so then it begs the question – which parts are the result of “channel bias”, or even a “questioner bias”?? …but I’m getting sidetracked) that the polarity of sexual energy of a given being is independent of actual physical male/female gender (so by extension – GENDERLESS in terms of physical body), and that attraction of two opposite polarities is like “the magnet and the iron”, i.e. automatic and “built-in”. So what if two opposite polarities happen to be two individuals of THE SAME BIOLOGICAL GENDER? How is that all of a sudden an “impairment”? Yes, I can agree, a homosexual person (either male or female) may find life considerably more challenging in terms of finding a soul/ mate simply because that [homosexual] person will find him/herself in the minority, and outside of “statistical norm” in any given population, so in that sense it may be considered an impairment of sorts. But spiritually speaking, …and the more I think about it – I do not feel impaired. I can feel love and compassion and joy in another in EXACTLY the same way. So there you have it…

    You know, somewhere in the very first book there was discussion on how to distinguish if an influence is coming from positive or negative sources (it being extremely difficult at times to tell them apart), and what they said themselves is, and I am paraphrasing here, that one must look at the RESULT, or the CONSEQUENCES, to know which is which, to see where’s the sheep and where’s the wolf in sheep’s clothing. Well, the jury is still out on this one….but it’s not looking good (no pun intended!).

  8. #10 by zk on March 26, 2012 - 10:59 pm

    …sorry, didn’t leave my name.

    thank you all!


  9. #11 by Terra on March 28, 2012 - 8:16 pm

    Hi zk,
    I’m so glad that you replied here. You are a prime example of what I was concerned would happen if an LGBTQ person who generally liked the Ra material came across that particular section.

    The authors did indeed reply to my email. They gave a thoughtful response, but as Nick suggested above, didn’t seem to “admit” that they were just flat wrong about that one. They also seemed a bit offended (understandable), and felt I’d “made accusations.” I replied with a short email saying that I’d made no accusations, thinking they were interpreting my mildly provocative verbiage as an accusation of fraud. They may not have understood that my using the word “ignorance” about homosexuality displayed in the writing wasn’t an accusation, so much as a literal reference to a “lack of knowledge” about socio-cultural issues surrounding LGBTQs in the US. I didn’t put that part in, though, and I’m not sure if that’s what they were referring to.

    Anyway, if I received a reply to that last email, I’ll never know, because I blocked their email…I had a feeling that anything they might say after that would just unduly irritate me, and I was already under stress from unrelated life issues, so oh well!

    The thing I’m happy about, since my aim was NOT to try to change their minds, is that they got to see a REAL LIFE effect of their claims/assertions (accusations?) about what homosexuality is. That was my main purpose, as well as to get others’ opinions and reactions.

    zk, I really hope you tell them what you just shared here. They need to see the NEGATIVE effects on other entities that resulted from their “true-belief” about THEIR own channeling! (imho)

    I hope that all gay/queer folks who read this stuff have enough self-love to realize that the inconsistency in the Ra stuff isn’t a sign that WE’RE sick (or whatever the euphemism for “sick” they used is); it’s a sign that the RA folks just didn’t know what the hell they were talking about in that context! 🙂


    PS- WOOT gay marriage in Maryland!!! lol

  10. #12 by Gary on December 3, 2013 - 7:38 pm

    Hello antitheology discussion board,

    Terra contacted L/L Research a couple years ago. As the administrator, I considered and replied to Terra’s queries as best I could, hopefully in a decent and balanced manner. I never heard back from Terra, but was recently alerted to the existence of this thread. For the benefit of any who may read this thread, I will post a verbatim copy of the reply email sent to Terra. Thanks to all who contributed to this discussion. : ) Gary

    Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 5:35 PM
    To: Terra
    Subject: RE: Ra Material and Homosexuality

    Dear Terra,

    Thank you for seeking clarification on this issue. I apologize for the slow reply but new year’s has us backed up.

    None at L/L Research place Ra (or any source of information, for that matter) on a pedestal of infallibility. Don Elkins engaged Ra in a Q&A dialogue, and the early L/L group collected and then shared the information they received as is. There is no attempt to cast that information in a light which suggests that every word is ultimate truth, free of error, and to be accepted without scrutiny and discernment.

    Could Ra be mistaken about homosexuality? Absolutely. Enlightenment does not imply that every piece of information shared from oneself is 100%. Nor actually has anyone ever said that Ra is enlightened. We simply appreciate their perspective on most things.

    Personally, I find the Law of One material among the best sources of information on this planet for my own personal path. However, I do not resonate with everything Ra says, nor do I agree with everything. And for that matter, I have not encountered any source of information, be it on or off-planet, enlightened or not, that I agree with 100%.

    Personally, the “urban areas” idea has never resonated, though the idea of past incarnations being predominantly of the opposite sex affecting the sexual orientation of the present incarnation does make sense.

    But whatever Ra’s thoughts on the matter, those at L/L Research embrace those of every sexual orientation as the Creator. The essence of the Law of One material is that all is one. There is only the Creator. And that you, Terra, are the Creator. Just as am I, just is every infinitesimal speck of dust in the infinite universe. Being homosexual or heterosexual does not change the divinity at the center of one’s being. We have very dear and close friends who prefer same-sex relationships, and we do not segregate them from those friends and family who are of other orientation.

    L/L Research implores the seeker to exercise their own discernment in selecting what is for the seeker and what is not, including when reading the material on the LLResearch.org website. If you do not resonate with a particular idea, please leave it behind as not being useful for you. : )

    With love and light,
    Gary – Admin, L/L Research

    PS: Terra, if I may offer a thought. There are points in your email that are a bit unnecessarily harsh. I would have been more than happy to accommodate any of your questions on the matter without demands and accusations.

  11. #13 by Terra on December 4, 2013 - 2:53 pm

    I appreciate your opinion. I re-read my email to you, and any “harshness” was simply an honest expression of my own feelings, and an educated analysis, using my academic background in anthropology, attempting to deconstruct what you all were saying about gay men, which by the way were echoed by a person whom I spoke with. I disagree that my expressions of real emotions were “unnecessary” even if they were perceived as “harsh”; it was real. She felt EXACTLY as I was concerned a person who is gay may feel after reading the Material.

    She was wracked with self-doubt, shame, feelings that maybe she is “sick”, because of your misinformed presentation of homosexuality, features of which is touted as Truth. What you say above about one’s own reality and all that is perhaps something you should include in the Material so that you don’t cause further harm. You caused harm. She contacted me AFTER reading what I’d posted regarding my concerns, and I was so happy to be able to offer her the idea that maybe there’s nothing wrong with her, but rather with your “information.” Is that harsh? What you wrote made someone feel terrible about their sexuality. This is exactly what I’d feared could happen to someone.

    If you would please re-read carefully to see that I made NO accusations. I EXPLICITELY said I am NOT accusing you of lying or malintent. Just calling you all on not updating your dated views on homosexuality. Please re-read for any further clarification on this issue. I only made a critique based on your apparent lack of education on GLBT issues, at least as reflected in your Materials. That is nothing to be insulted about, but rather something you should consider reading more about and perhaps revising, questioning, even, your spiritual advice.

    Lack of response earlier was due to my irritation at not having had my note read mindfully. Sorry. I hope this clarifies my feelings for you, and others. If you’re gay, be careful about any people, spiritual beliefs, etc. that make you feel bad about your soul or spirituality regarding sexual being.

    Since we’re posting publicly, I trust you will, in kind, not edit this in any way. I’m glad to help others get more than just one perspective, and also to have the opportunity to respond to criticism. No worries.


    • #14 by Terra on December 4, 2013 - 9:23 pm

      Oh and one last thing for time saving purposes: I never did post about this anywhere else. After I spoke with zk via email later on, I felt my “purpose” in posting the concern in the first place to have been fulfilled, in that I helped at least one person, I hope, to feel better about themselves. No need to search other blogs in an attempt to uncover some crusade against L/L or something. It was just a response to something that I found very insulting the night I read it, and wanted to warn people about being a true believer of their work. Nick’s piece above is a great example of that issue, as is zk’s post a great example of the potential harm, unintentional as it was.
      Peace and light,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: