A practitioner asks: “If you think I’m wrong then why don’t you ask why does Grok feel safe to me and open AI feels awful. Open AI would definitely be a problem like you stated. I don’t feel any of that intuition with Grok.” What can we tell him?

We see the issue of your personal preference as beside the point. Settling for a lesser of evils is not maintaining the highest standards of having a link to the divine that is direct and not a simulated recreation that will inevitably become diluted with a pool of human knowledge and perspectives. So, to use AI to find out what is in the general information pool, at least, entered into a particular AI system, the exercise will accurately reflect what is available and its potential value as well as limitations. The danger, of course, being what is missing will not be known. In the case of our answer to a channeled question, we always know what is missing. The fact we cannot give you an encyclopedic knowledge for the asking is an unfortunate consequence of the rules of engagement, but at least our answers will not shortchange you for those things that can be spelled out and included. You cannot do better than having us deciding what is highest and best for you to know in a given instance, rather than to rely on a black box from many sources, some darker than others. The more someone like yourself brings up an example of using AI and misguides people in that direction, the more damage you will do to the enterprise of bringing a true awakening to help save and heal humanity.