TerraKor logo


Date of reception: 15 Sept 1989

Love and light, my Terran friends. It seemed only yesterday that I first sat at this console to put into print the opening message of Series One. Yet, here I am seventeen messages later and beginning Series Three. How truthful is your saying that "time flies".

At this time, I wish to consider a number of common concepts in the "New Age" liturgy, beginning with those that are concerned with communications with alien entities. I will also present the Alliance viewpoint on them and discuss our agreements and differences.


One of the most frequently cited phrases in these various messages is the "non-interference directive". Just what is it and how does it apply to Earth and its peoples? To illuminate it fully, it is necessary to examine the wording of these laws.

To begin, the several interstellar organizations such as the Alliance and the Confederation do not share a common directive. Although their intent is the same, their restrictiveness is a matter of the philosophical orientation of the involved group.

The Confederation law is the most comprehensive and limiting of them all, primarily because they are the most adamantly opposed to outside influences on developing societies. Allow me to quote from the opening paragraphs.

"It is the long-standing view of the Galactic Confederation of Planets that each and every world within the totality of Creation is a sovereign entity. It is further understood that each and every world has a destiny that the Infinite One has ordained. That destiny is in the Confederation's view entirely in the hands of the Deity and the beings who inhabit the many worlds.

"It is therefore hereby declared for now and for all time hence that the Confederation and its diverse worlds shall in no way interfere in nor permit interference in any planet's destiny.

"This we have sworn by the name of the Infinite One."

The several dozen pages that form the actual text of the directive are much too lengthy and involved to quote in full here, but they delineate the extent of Confederation adherence to the policy, and offer four conditions whereby the directive can be considered inapplicable:

  1. When a world's peoples, through a natural catastrophe or a self-created disaster, have been afflicted to the extent that the society is deemed no longer viable or capable of progressing without assistance.
  2. When a world is faced with a peril from an outside force that would result in unrecoverable destruction if it were allowed to occur unabated. This does NOT include alien incursion unless the attack would cause such destruction.
  3. When a race poses an imminent and otherwise uncontrollable danger to a Confederation world in proximity to it.
  4. When such an action is deemed to be necessary by Confederation advisers in the Higher Realms.

Note that the presence of Omegans on Earth is not covered under these exceptions, since their activities here do not imperil your survival, nor has their program advanced to the point where you pose a "clear and present danger" to Confederation planets. As such, there is no possibility of direct Confederation intervention in Omegan affairs.

This is, as I have said before, the primary reason for the conflict between the Alliance and the Sector Command of the Confederation.

The Alliance's non-interference laws are considerably more liberal, and include provisions for our action in non-lethal situations, if the problem is due to an external influence that cannot be properly addressed by the inhabitants of the affected planet.

Obviously, the Omegan infiltration is beyond your capacity to resist. We strongly recommend that you judiciously avoid becoming directly involved in this conflict, because as I have stated before, while the Omegans need you as a species, they have no need for you as individuals. If you overtly confront them, they will kill you without the merest hesitation.

I cannot emphasize too much that your weapon against them is revitalized morality in your society. Labor to that end and let us handle the "dirty work".

Given the Confederation position, how then does one interpret their many statements that mass landings will be carried out in a time of tribulation? Remember the stipulation of the first exception to their policy.

Such an evacuation will be within the scope of the directive only if the situation has become so critical and irrevocable that it represents the end of humanity's dominance on Earth. Their appearance in your skies will sound the death knell for your culture.

It may not represent the finish of your race, but those who remain will be no more than savages, predators living out miserable existences without hope. You may survive, but your civilization will be forever gone.

In short, take no comfort from the promises that the Confederation will be there to take you away, because it will mean that you will be leaving behind an all-but-doomed world. Joy will not be found in departing.

You might ask, then, since the Alliance is more directly involved in Terran affairs, is it possible that we will carry out an evacuation without the precondition of social collapse? As I wrote in a previous message, such a drastic action is very unlikely. In the history of the Alliance, mass landings and removal of the people have occurred on only ten occasions, all but one in response to unavoidable natural perils.

The one exception was a calamity that resulted from all-out nuclear war, and we removed only those not engaged in the conflict.

Our approach, as I have said, is to do all in our power to eliminate the conditions that would precipitate the necessity for an evacuation. We prefer to work within a society to alter the courses of action that historically have led to devastating wars.

Once we determine that such an eventuality is not within the ability of a race to stave off, we will in most cases intervene, if the world is of potential value to the Alliance.

The nature and intensity of our activity will depend on the cultural history of a world. A planet with a long past of violence does not merit the effort that we expend on one where a generally peaceful civilization is imperilled by the actions of militarism on the part of a few.

On the other hand, we will always come to the aid of worlds where outside agentry threatens their stability or survival. There need be no immediate danger. The critical consideration is that the negative influence is alien. We are on Earth for that very reason.

Our invariable approach in such cases is to expel the external force. If their presence is unknown to the inhabitants, we will seek to defeat them without the populace ever becoming aware of our presence, but whatever the situation, our single focus is ending the hostile intrusion.

We do not attempt to reshape the world's societies to Alliance standards unless specifically requested to do so by the people. In this respect, we are very much "in tune" with Confederation non-interference policies.

In short, the difference between the Confederation and the Alliance is that we are willing to move in when it is appropriate, whereas they will do so only when absolutely necessary.

Neither of us will seek to impose our ways on a world, but The Alliance is dedicated to assuring that no other alien influence imposes theirs. While the Confederation is talking to you the Alliance is acting for you.


The next New Age phenomenon is "channeling", the modern term for what has variously been called spiritualism, mediumship and so on. It would seem, judging by the reports, that those not actively communing with someone either from other worlds or from the "beyond" are a distinct minority.

This is obviously a considerable overstatement, but that impression must be given to outsiders viewing the New Age impartially and curiously. The high incidence of such reports serves to create the impression that more than a few are in fact in the field purely to reap a "fast buck" at the expense of the interested but incautious public.

It is not my purpose here to pass judgement on the merit of these claims. If they are fabrications for profit, time will weed them out. A "hard core" of reliable channels will remain and will continue to offer useful information to your New Age adherents.

At this point, let me say that the Alliance does not involve itself in the channeling of information. We employ physical contacts with other peoples and races, preferring the personal and intimate interaction that is possible only with "face to face" meetings.

As such, if at any time you are made aware of some who claim to be the telepathic "channels" for the Alliance, treat these stories as pure fiction. As you say, "forewarned is forearmed".

Although we do not indulge in this form of communication, I will verify that is does indeed occur, and that the primary user of this method here is the Confederation. Those messages that you have received that have validity are in all but about ten percent of the cases of Confederation origin.

Those which do not derive from the Confederation are from races operating under their aegis under an agreement of mutual assistance.

I will say again that the Alliance will neither verify nor disprove the accuracy of messages received by any medium, psychic or physical. We shall not validate any alleged communications involving well-known "New Age" figures in the U.S. and other nations.

Nor will we avow the activities on Earth of any worlds or organizations other than those directly involving the Alliance program. The Confederation tolerates our presence in this system, but there are differences that will not lead to a "mutual admiration society" any time in the near future. We do not ask for their verification, and they do not expect it from us.


The next facet of modern "saucer" activity is the phenomenon known as "abduction", the alleged capture and subsequent actions carried out by alien beings upon Terrans. Let me first state that this has NEVER been a policy of the Alliance or the Confederation.

Those several races that are carrying on this program, all of which are known to us, are operating without the support or the approval of the Confederation. However, because their operations do not involve Confederation worlds, the non-interference policy disallows their response beyond regular diplomatic couriers with official Writs of Desistance demanding the cessation of the activities, which are uniformly ignored because they carry no legal weight outside the Confederation.

We of the Alliance have perceived no reason to interfere with "abduction" practices, because in no cases have the programs endangered a Terran life nor caused significant psychological or physical detriment to the subjects. Certain well-known instances have alleged major negative consequences, but in those cases, the impact has been considerably "hyped" for emotional (or financial) reasons.

The purpose of these activities is threefold:
  1. Scientific curiosity about Terran life-forms, particularly the diversity of human species, which as I said in an earlier message, is almost unknown on other worlds (four races involved at the present time).
  2. An extended series of tests by one race to determine whether at least some of your racial strains derived from their early interstellar explorations many millenia ago (similar in several respects to our own initial journey to Earth). This ultimately proved negative and the experiments were abandoned.
  3. Medical research concerning your genetically-based resistance to certain external influences. This involves a race very like yours who are facing a certain doom unless a similar genetic resistance can be inbred within a few generations.

The Alliance has offered technical assistance to them, and this program will be discontinued as soon as loose ends are cared for and final traces of the activities are erased.

Because the remaining operations have been deemed not sinister, and are motivated by scientific interest, the Alliance has found no pressing reason to interfere in them. If in the future they are considered to pose a hazard to your people, we will step in and bring them to an end. The races involved have been so informed, and they are willing to abide by our limitationss, knowing that we are less restrained than the Confederation.

Suffice it to say, then, that although "abductions" will continue for the indefinite future on that basis, if any claims come forth of unusually bad or painful experiences, or telling of subsequent effects of a particularly discomforting nature, treat them skeptically.


The final topic is one that I have discussed from other perspectives. This is the topic of God and religions. The general view of the subject in the New Age is that of an "inner being" type of God, a Deity that is part and parcel of humanity. We ourselves have on occasion indicated that we view God as the total of all that exists and much more. Let me now expand on that in considerable detail and "let the chips fall where they may". Cynical readers, be warned!

God as we view Him is the Creator of the universe (and of all the other universes that may exist). We believe that He created all from nothing. Your own science's "Big Bang" theory merely restates that in a non-theistic way. It is often said that the further back in time cosmology goes, the closer it gets to looking into the face of God. The notion is colorful but accurate.

God, being omnipresent, is thus in every place, and all that exists is within Him. It is therefore safe to say that all that exists is Him by virtue of its being His handiwork. However, our view is much more than that. Since He is the Creator, and we are all His creations, we are roughly in the same position as a computer trying to learn about its programmer.

We can surmise and hypothesize and dogmatize, but we are attempting with our finite, imperfect intellects to comprehend that which is infinite and perfect. Our capacity to understand is inevitably framed by what human minds have experienced. We tend to view God in our terms, and with our emotions and feelings. In short, we create in our minds a God with limitations.

I am reminded of a cartoon in one of your publications some years ago, which depicted two goldfish swimming in a bowl. One is saying to the other, "Of course there's a God. Who do you think changes the water?"

We are all fish in a very big bowl trying to envision Who keeps our water clean, so to speak. To truly fathom the reality of God would require a mind like His own, infinite and all-knowing. We do, however, discern from His works the most obvious truths about the real nature of the Workman.

God is a God of Order. The entire universe exists on precisely crafted laws of "nature", physical attributes that allow the material universe to operate smoothly and efficiently.

We are well aware of the law of thermodynamics dealing with entropy, the gradual decrease of order in the universe to a state of random, uniform disorder. We know that ultimately the degeneration of matter will be complete through proton decay.

It is, however, presumptuous of us in our finite, time-oriented existence to assume that an eternal Deity is at all impressed with the passage of even the trillions of years that would be involved in such a chaotic climax to our universe. To a Deity who dwells in forever, even our longest conception of time is the merest part of a heartbeat.

Your Bible teaches in 2 Peter 3:8 that to God, a thousand years are like a day, and a day like a thousand years. To God, time is irrelevant, because He exists outside of time.

Consider again the Bible, in which Jesus Christ said in John 8:58, "Before Abraham was, I am." A deep, fundamental concept is clearly elucidated in those few words. God is not only eternal but co-existent in all times. God views time as we view space.

Is is easy to envision expanding ourselves to the point where all of space is within our immediate view, and all that is happening anywhere in space is instantly visible to us. The concept is not at all difficult to grasp.

In that same way, God encompasses not only all of space but all of time. He is present not only everywhere, but everyWHEN. To Him, time is just another dimension of physical existence, of importance to us who are bounded by it, but nothing to Him.

Returning to the original point, the New Age view is that God is in man, and therefore man is God. The notion is charming and seductive to the arrogance of human self-importance, but it is of course dead wrong.

If a carpenter builds a house and resides in it, you may hear said, "This house is you", meaning that one sees in its design and its craftsmanship the unique personality of the builder. Can one then say to the house, "You are the carpenter"?

Humanity, being creations of God, reflect His nature. In that way, we may say that we "are" God. However, this in no way proves that we are literally God or Godly in our human nature. What then is meant when your scriptures refer to man being made in God's "image"?

To the uninitiated, this evokes an idea of a humanoid Deity, a biped with white hair and a beard sitting in a physical throne in Heaven, looking like your Santa Claus (or, if you are of a film-going nature, like George Burns). If this sort of charming imagery helps one to personalize and demystify Him a bit, so that one might draw closer to Him in worship, then it has value, but reality is vastly different.

The likeness referred to in the Scriptures is the spiritual identity. The physicality of a human being is the carrier. Our bodies are the houses. WE are the residents. It is our souls, our incorporeal essences, that are in God's image, because God is a God of Spirit. This is the second Nature of God that may be surmised from His works.

A third is that God is a God of Unchangeability. By His very nature, He is an eternally consistent Deity. He cannot, in short, "change His mind". The laws that exist to govern universal nature are the same now as they were at the "Big Bang" and will be at the last moment of everything.

Remember that He is eternal and co-existent throughout eternity. That nature disallows change. His will has always existed and will be the same at every point in time, because the merest change at any point affects every other point. He lives in His own time, not in ours.

His perfection also encompasses a perfect will, and a change would then presuppose imperfection that engendered the change, invalidating His perfection and thus his Godly nature.

The target of this argument is the New Age concept that sin, or defiance of God's eternal laws, is an invalid or anachronistic principle. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In the Holy Works of every race throught the civilized universe, every Word of God handed down through the generations speaks of the tendency of imperfect human nature to stray from adherence to His perfect will.

In no case has there ever been found a recanting by God of those laws that have existed without beginning, just because of the reasoning that I presented a moment ago. What was sin at the dawn of time will be sin at its midnight. Sin is an absolute.

This will certainly not sit well with those religions and pseudo-faiths that seek to decriminalize sin so as to free humanity from the ancient ways of good and evil. Your nation is beset by a deadly mania for "anything goes".

The "modern" religions, eager to recall those who have departed because the restrictions of their faith were "spoiling their fun", have decided to make church and religious life easier. This they do by arbitrarily deciding that God didn't really mean those laws to apply today, and by redefining what constitutes sin.

The New Age mysticism and certain Eastern quasi-religions do away fully with the concept of sin. They are doing their adherents no favors. God didn't relax his standards.

God is also a God of Justice. When He reveals His laws to humanity, He has always made perfectly clear the price to be exacted for one's disobedience. The judgement that would follow human defiance of His tenets has been amply written out throughout the Scriptures and the histories of every world.

No being, knowing of the messages in the Holy Works, can truly expect to deliberately disobey the laws without inviting the penalties prescribed for them in the Works. Sin is by definition a conscious act of will.

Your world has a saying that "God never sends anyone to Hell". Without digressing to discuss that topic, the point is well presented: the individual merits his or her own judgement, be it reward or penalty. God is the impartial Judge. We justify or convict ourselves.

God is a God of Fairness. When in human imperfection we disobey His laws, and He is aware that it is inevitable, it would be less than fair to exact a penalty without providing a means of atonement and acknowledging true regret for sinful actions. In no case is this not provided abundantly.

On all worlds, every person has full recourse to God's forgiveness for indiscretions and failures. We find that on your world the closest to our own is in the Christian teachings.

I have in the past stated that on Korendor, we had no incarnation of God in our form that apparently took place on Earth in the person of Jesus Christ. I wish to dwell on this singular being for a few moments.

Primarily at the suggestion of our brother Bob Renaud, we undertook to make an intensive study of all of the available literature and research that centered on Jesus. We have pored over thousands of scholarly works, and more thousands of historical records. It is our considered judgement that there are but two possibilities in Jesus Christ:

He is indeed God;
He was the most talented and convincing liar in human history.

Your author, C.S. Lewis, described it this way in his book, Mere Christianity.

"Then comes the real shock. Among these Jews there suddenly turns up a man who goes about talking as if He was God. He claims to forgive sins. He says He has always existed. He says He is coming to judge the world as the end of time. Now let us get this clear. Among pantheists, like the Indians, anyone might say that he was a part of God, or one with God: there would be nothing very odd about it. But this man, since He was a Jew, could not mean that kind of God. God, in their language, meant the being outside the world Who had made it and was infinitely different from anything else. And when you have grasped that, you will see that what this man said was quite simply, the most shocking thing that has been uttered by human lips.

"One part of the claim tends to slip past us unnoticed because we have heard it so often that we no longer see what it amounts to. I mean the claim to forgive sins: any sins. Now unless the speaker is God, this is really so preposterous as to be comic. We can all understand how a man forgives offences against himself. You tread on my toe and I forgive you, you steal my money and I forgive you. But what should we make of a man, himself unrobbed and untrodden on, who announced that he forgave you for treading other men's toes and stealing other men's money? Asinine fatuity is the kindest description we should give of his conduct. Yet this is what Jesus did. He told people that their sins were forgiven, and never waited to consult all the other people whom their sins had undoubtedly injured. He unhesitatingly behaved as if He was the party chiefly concerned, the person chiefly offended in all offences. This makes sense only if He really was the God whose laws are broken and whose love is wounded in every sin. In the mouth of any speaker who is not God, these words would imply what I can regard as a silliness and conceit unrivaled by any other character in history.

"Yet (and this is the strange, significant thing) even His enemies, when they read the gospels, do not usually get the impression of silliness and conceit. Still less do unprejudiced readers. Christ says that He is "humble and meek" and we believe Him; not noticing that, if He were merely a man, humility and meekness are the very last characteristics we could attribute to some of His sayings.

"I am trying to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: "I am ready to accept Jesus as the great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God." That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic--on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg--or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."

Our studies echo the observations of Mr. Lewis. There is no rational basis on which to found the second argument, because surely after twenty centuries even the most exquisite fabrication would have been long disproven and rejected. Jesus Christ has outlived all of his critics. Our conclusion: Jesus Christ IS God.

Therefore, His life provides for humanity the same basis for God's mercy and forgiveness as we of other worlds know in our own faiths. Acceptance of God as the Creator and belief in His Word as made available to us is the condition for what you call salvation. The difference is in the approach that God used to deliver that great message of salvation to your world. He spoke to us. He came personally to you.

Another convincing factor is that Christianity is unique amongst all your Earthly beliefs in professing that man cannot by himself earn entry into the Higher Realms (Heaven, in your terms). Every non-Christian faith demands full adherence to this or that set of creeds and tenets as the condition for gaining Heaven. This principle exists nowhere in the Alliance, the Confederation or any other group of our acquaintance.

Although on Earth God sent to you Jesus Christ as the Messiah, to be your provider of salvation, whereas ours comes with belief in God's word as a direct instrument, the precept is the same: salvation comes by belief rather than deeds, and God forgives your sins because of repentence based on faith, not because of actions of atonement.

For that reason, were we asked to provide a judgement on which religious philosophies were divinely inspired, we would conclusively select Christianity. It alone contains the essence that is the foundation for universal faith.

This will evoke controversy, no doubt, but we deal in facts. We are not proselytizing for Christianity. Believe as you will, but Christ is your answer.

Lastly, there is a New Age theory that Jesus Christ has also appeared as "Sananda", an "ascended Master". This is patently false. No doubt it derived from Eastern mysticism's feeble attempt to explain Christ so as to reject His being God while still presenting Him as a Godly being. This concept meshes with the New Age "religion" of "man-is-God", and of "at-one-ment" as a substitute for worshipping God as our Creator.

As we have already shown, this flies in the face of historical reality and universal truths. It appears to be just another effort to discredit Him (one of many, if your records are any indication). As with all those others, it is doomed to failure as well. Its major danger is that it will lead you away from the truth of God and toward your own eternal destruction. Don't be misled. The cost is far too dear!

The topic of my next message is at the moment unknown. As of this writing, it is possible that I may be forced to take a hiatus of a year or more to deal with pressing business on Korendor. In that case, it may very well be early in 1991 before this series of messages can resume. The time will be unimportant to you the reader, but numerous things can change in the intervening months. It will be an interesting year.

Va i luce, and peace be yours.

I am ArKay.


2008 Robert P. Renaud -- all rights reserved