Abraham's memory is not so great. Take this example from a common Abraham Hicks story about how Snuggles the dog nearly ate Renegade the chicken:
August 26, 2007 Sedona, AZ
"And Jerry had a sensing of something going on, went out on the back porch and looked, and there is Renegade, apparently already dead and ready to be Snuggles's lunch (although Snuggles really did not care for it. He just killed her for the fun of it, it seemed). And Jerry had a shotgun (that he had never fired) for just such an occasion. And he shot it into the air to get Snuggles attention. (And blew a hole in his favorite tree, by the way, and the telephone line.) And Snuggles dropped Renegade. And Renegade shook herself off and got up and came home quickly. And Esther said, 'Abraham, I thought Snuggles had killed renegade. I thought Renegade was dead. And we said, she wasn't dead, she was just getting ready to be dead.'" (This same version is retold in the May 12, 2007, Gaithersburg, MD workshop.)
Mexican Cruise (January 24, 2010)
"And one day, Jerry felt a very strong urge to go out, and he went out. And sure enough, Snuggles had Renegade. And Renegade was hanging like a limp rag, and Snuggles was running away. And Jerry yelled, 'Snuggles!' And because Snuggles is a domesticated dog and therefore prone to some human guilt, Snuggles dropped Renegade...when Jerry yelled...and when the chicken hit the ground, she just shook herself off and ran home. And Esther said, 'Abraham, I thought Snuggles (sic) was dead. And we said, Snuggles (sic) was just ready to be dead.'"
From the 2007 telling to the 2010 telling of this adorable little story, Jerry seems to have lost his gun. Initially, I was going to give Abe the benefit of the doubt and say that it was another time that Snuggles had attempted to eat Renegade. However, I find it hard to believe that Esther repeatedly said to Abraham every time Renegade was caught by Snuggles, "I thought Renegade was dead." It's odd to me that three years after telling this story 3 times (at least, I have heard it more elsewhere), that "Abraham" would have forgotten the gun and explained that Jerry's yelling worked because Snuggles was a "domesticated dog." Also, in the 2010 recording, Abraham mistakenly calls Renegade Snuggles at the end of the story.
For reference, in Esther and Jerry's interview with The Independent, published in 2007 (the same year as the Sedona, AZ version) they retell the story, with the gun.
The Independent Interview
"We had chickens for a few years. We had this one chicken, Renegade, who wouldn't stay in the yard. She went to the neighbours', where there were dogs. And sure enough the neighbour's dog..."
"Snuggles," says Jerry.
"Snuggles got her. Jerry saw that. Didn't you shoot a gun..."
"Yes."
I like your blog. I am an ex-new ager myself and have dealt with the whole Abe Hicks thing since I was about 24 (I'm now 40). I have always questioned their methods to many people but seems like an unseen authority is always stronger than reality, common sense or just simple observation.
ReplyDeleteI feel the same way about Carolyn Miss. I Know plenty of women and a couuple of my new-age ex's who swear by her work but when you take a look at those who follow her. Nothing has changed in their lives besides just a few bucks less in the pocket and an incredible irritating ability to put their proverbial heads in the sand when it comes to dealing with anything head on.
So keep up the good work.
Thanks for the comment, Detached Observer. Yeah, I have to accept that Abraham Hicks fans will adore them regardless of what I, or anyone else, finds out about "them" and the Hickses. Same with Myss. After all, even when her Ph.D. was exposed as being from an unaccredited "distance learning" university, none of her followers seemed to mind.
ReplyDeleteThanks again for stopping by.
ROFL I didn't know that about her fake Ph.D, amazing. When people really want to believe, noone can tell them otherwise. Great blog. Usually I don't comment.
ReplyDeleteHey again teacherben. Thanks for commenting here as well! Yes, Caroline Myss has a big, fat fake Ph.d.
ReplyDeleteThe Australia government put out an alert on Greenwich University (where Myss allegedly got her Ph.d.), saying: "To our knowledge, Greenwich University has never been accredited by any recognised government accreditation authority to deliver higher education awards. It authorises itself to award degrees in its company objects."
Again, I appreciate your input.
I haven't heard the stories, read the books or seen the videos. I was thinking about borrowing from the library since they have them available to check out. That is why I am out here. That and a couple of webinar invites that my friend who is really in to them fowarded to me. I was trying to see what all he had written.
ReplyDeleteI know someone who is related to him. At least, I am pretty sure they are. They don't know I know. I found out in a round about way. Not even sure how I would approach it. Hey... just wanted to let you know that so and so and I were snooping through your stuff and noticed these photos of Jerry. Not sure that would go over. It is not like the frame was sitting out where there was easy access or anyone could see them.
A co-worker had been reading a book called the Secret or something. Big follower of their stuff and still is. They swear by this stuff.
Anyway this co-worker discovered somehow that another person we worked with was related and had several family photos of them in a rotating photo album at their desk. Kinda surprising, based on what I am reading. This person is so freakin down to earth.
Isn't Jerry in his early to mid 80's? Esther looked like she is a number of years younger. Early 60's maybe? Either that or she wasn't aging as fast.
I am just wondering if maybe the reason he isn't remembering all the details of the chicken/dog story is age related. Is he starting to suffer from dementia? Not that should discount his earlier writing.
I don't have anything to base this on. Nothing has ever been said to me about him or the other family members having any medical problems.
Hey Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment. Just want to clarify that it is the collective consciousness that Esther claims to channel that made the error, not Jerry.
You are pretty close on their ages. From what I've been able to find, Jerry is in his late 80s, though some sources have told me it's more like early 90s. Esther is in her early 60s.
And they haven't mentioned Jerry's leukemia to you at all?
Thanks again for the comment.
My connection is through my friend who is into this stuff/group and who works in the same department. I will ask and see if she (my friend) knows anything.
ReplyDeleteSaying I have a conversation with the individual (the possible relative) once a month would be a stretch.
I just thought it was interesting that these posts are out there at a time I am looking at reading this stuff and it not being that long ago when we were in their office snooping around and I saw the photos.
The individual is very cordial and respectful to everyone in the company.
The story and info posted just sorta jarred me and I felt a need to comment.
Hey again Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteWell, I certainly appreciate you being willing to comment. Sorry that the story and info were so jarring ; ) But thank you for stopping by to share your information.
kyra
Kyra, I need to thank you. That jarring I got from reading your blog kept me from taking a wrong turn. I am glad I decided to research this before joining the group and trying their material. ;)
ReplyDeleteHey again Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteThank you for the support! I certainly wish I'd had something like this before I had started applying the teachings to my life. It would have saved me a lot of time ; ).
Thanks again for the comments and appreciation,
kyra
Hello Kyra,
ReplyDeleteI stumbled across your blog and you do raise some points that bear further thought. I have some questions for you also:
1. Just because using processes of AH didn't work for you, does that mean it doesn't work 110%? Hardly a controlled trial. This suggests issues with your own intellectual algorrhythmics. ie. Could the issue be with your application of the processes, rather than the process itself?
2. Have you had such a bad experience that you now need to continue to devote much of your time to vitriolic blogging? Surely there is a time to let it go and fill life with whatever makes you happy , rather than becoming a crusader- wasn't Jerry a crusader at one time? you have alluded to this in a previous blog.
3. Do you make any money from your blog? If so, it would mean that you are in fact benefitting from the work of E & J/ Abe, by criticising it, rather than critiquing it.
4. It is not enough for you to write in effect " You prove to me a verifiable event and I will consider the evidence", as you did in the case of a respondee who suggested that apparently some even if few, AIDS suffers have had a return to no evidence of the virus in their system. You make some big statements without any evidence or referencing of the material that informs you.
Yuo suggest that Esther and Jerry have a certain hubris and now look where they are- that could well be said, equally, look at your own thought processes, you are not the enlightened intellect that you may think you are. Many of your criticisms of E & J/ Abe, could be levelled at your logic.
Where do I stand?
Like you, I have read a number of their publications and yes, it is a money making machine, no doubt. It could be suggested that they could distribute their materials for a lot less than $9.99- can't be denied. There is however a difference between blaming the victim and yet taking self-responibility, the latter being an issue in society in general.
Only a stupid person would shun medical intervention on the basis of what anyone tells them, certainly Louise Hay writes that allopathic medicine should not necessarily be utilised, especially as it often helps folk to get to a better thought plane, take responsibility, leave the job they hate which stresses them, let go of bitterness and so on- surely that makes sense, even if that cannot be easily evidenced given the variation and complexity of disease and co-morbidity, and individual circumstance etc.
I agree that there are a lot of charletans, and a lot of gullible folk ready to give them cash. Transpose this notion to any religion- there may exist suboptimal priests/ministers of any faith, but that doesn't mean that the basic ideology is completely trash.
Whether Esther and Jerry are complete fakers or not, and Abe is waffle- which it probably may be, there is a certain value in the basic tenets espoused. Anyone following anything to extreme , could well be demonstrating Darwin's theory of Natural Selection.
Again, I take your point re: the cash flow, equally who thought that Esther and Jerry suddenly became immortal with sharing their ideas?
for some folk, it has at least encouraged them to take responsibility and get back in the seat of their own lives and not blame anyone else for wherever they are- is that bad ?
Interested to read your comment, unless you have let the blog go- which would be most likely be better for your health. Some of your posts sound as though you fancied Jerry but he didn't look at you twice, or you are a professional victim- that isn't a criticism, but an observation which invites your response.
Good Luck and may happiness be yours in any event.
Hello Think Before You Write,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment. I'll try to respond to all your points.
1. Just because using processes of AH didn't work for you, does that mean it doesn't work 110%? Hardly a controlled trial. This suggests issues with your own intellectual algorrhythmics. ie. Could the issue be with your application of the processes, rather than the process itself?
I think there is a misunderstanding here. I believed that AH was working for me. There were a lot of things that I believed I had manifested.
2. Have you had such a bad experience that you now need to continue to devote much of your time to vitriolic blogging? Surely there is a time to let it go and fill life with whatever makes you happy , rather than becoming a crusader- wasn't Jerry a crusader at one time? you have alluded to this in a previous blog.
Well, this is not all that I do. There are many more aspects to my life.
3. Do you make any money from your blog? If so, it would mean that you are in fact benefitting from the work of E & J/ Abe, by criticising it, rather than critiquing it.
I don't make any money. I don't have ads or really any way of making money via this work. But even if I did, I wouldn't have a problem with that. There are plenty of skeptics out there who criticize/critique religion who make money from it and help a good deal of people.
4. It is not enough for you to write in effect " You prove to me a verifiable event and I will consider the evidence", as you did in the case of a respondee who suggested that apparently some even if few, AIDS suffers have had a return to no evidence of the virus in their system. You make some big statements without any evidence or referencing of the material that informs you.
In science, the burden of proof is always on the person making the claim--not on the skeptic to prove why it isn't true. Saying that about AIDs is no better than using spontaneous remission of cancer to prove LOA. There's no reason to believe LOA or positive thinking has anything to do with either. Also, I believe the commenter you are referring to was talking about people who continue to have the virus but it does not get worse. This is not the same thing as returning to perfect health.
Yuo suggest that Esther and Jerry have a certain hubris and now look where they are- that could well be said, equally, look at your own thought processes, you are not the enlightened intellect that you may think you are. Many of your criticisms of E & J/ Abe, could be levelled at your logic.
I don't need to be enlightened or smart to recognize a con-artist.
Like you, I have read a number of their publications and yes, it is a money making machine, no doubt. It could be suggested that they could distribute their materials for a lot less than $9.99- can't be denied. There is however a difference between blaming the victim and yet taking self-responibility, the latter being an issue in society in general.
Taking responsibility for your own rape is victim blame. That is almost the exact definition of victim blaming. It's one thing to take responsibility for things you had a part in. It's another thing to assume that you are responsible for all things that happen to you--without any evidence to show that is the case.
Only a stupid person would shun medical intervention on the basis of what anyone tells them, certainly Louise Hay writes that allopathic medicine should not necessarily be utilised, especially as it often helps folk to get to a better thought plane, take responsibility, leave the job they hate which stresses them, let go of bitterness and so on- surely that makes sense, even if that cannot be easily evidenced given the variation and complexity of disease and co-morbidity, and individual circumstance etc.
ReplyDeleteI have already discussed my response to this in various posts, thoroughly. My issue is that their materials do offer an alternative to medicine that is dangerous and unproven.
I agree that there are a lot of charletans, and a lot of gullible folk ready to give them cash. Transpose this notion to any religion- there may exist suboptimal priests/ministers of any faith, but that doesn't mean that the basic ideology is completely trash.
Of course that doesn't. What makes it trash is that it's a sham.
Whether Esther and Jerry are complete fakers or not, and Abe is waffle- which it probably may be, there is a certain value in the basic tenets espoused. Anyone following anything to extreme , could well be demonstrating Darwin's theory of Natural Selection.
Victim blame, narcissism, and indifference are not things that I aspire to, and they are all things that the teachings encourage.
Again, I take your point re: the cash flow, equally who thought that Esther and Jerry suddenly became immortal with sharing their ideas?
There are plenty of Abers I know who venerate Jerry and Esther.
for some folk, it has at least encouraged them to take responsibility and get back in the seat of their own lives and not blame anyone else for wherever they are- is that bad ?
Take responsibility for things like cancer, rape, car accidents? This is where the philosophy is dangerous.
Interested to read your comment, unless you have let the blog go- which would be most likely be better for your health. Some of your posts sound as though you fancied Jerry but he didn't look at you twice, or you are a professional victim- that isn't a criticism, but an observation which invites your response.
No and no. I've explained my situation in various comments.
Good Luck and may happiness be yours in any event.
Thank you. The same to you.
Thank you for posting this- it is consistent with my own experience of this business. I was in an audience at a certain Hicks LA conference, and a woman was selected by "Abraham" to ask a question. She seemed familiar (as did the question) and a quick memory recall positively identified her as someone in a previous "Abraham" video, asking the same question, almost to a T. It then became apparent that there were more than a few plants in the audience. Naturally these opportunities for "Abraham" are golden as she can now appear to shine with canned answers which are tested to elicit positive response from the audience.
ReplyDeleteThey key to a good con is to mix 90% truth with 10% fiction- preferably a 10% which will positively manifest some cash into the bottom line. My infatuation with the New Age was, (fortunately for my pocketbook although $200 lighter already), averted after this incident.
Late to this forum, because my darling wife has taken an interest in this crap.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, it's nearly impossible to shoot down a telephone line with a shotgun. The allegation that he "blew a hole in his favorite tree, by the way, and the telephone line"
is literally a physical impossibility. To blow a hole in the tree, he'd have been having to use a slug. A shotgun slug would not, after penetrating a tree - and expanding to probably at least one and a half times the diameter of the slug - put a "hole" in a telephone line - though it may sever it completely. If he was using shot, he could likely shoot at the same spot on a telephone line multiple times without putting a "hole" in it.
The more I look, the more bogus stuff I see - even the most trifling comments can mean something.
Thanks for your work, Kyra.