Were Churchill and Roosevelt fallen beings?

Question: In the My Lives book, it states that three fallen beings met at the Yalta Conference in 1945: Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt. While I can believe that Stalin was unquestionably a fallen being, I never believed that the other two were. Can the ascended masters please clarify?

Answer by Ascended Master Jesus through Kim Michaels, given at a conference in Estonia 2019.

Exposing a fallen being is not a matter of belief. What is implied in the question is that you have a certain view of Churchill and Roosevelt, that you have been conditioned to have by what you have learned about them through normal history. It implies that you are taking a certain human evaluation, a certain human overlay that has been created, and you are using this to say: “Well, these could not be fallen beings.”

I understand it in the sense that clearly Stalin was in a different category of fallen beings than Churchill and Roosevelt. Churchill and Roosevelt did not systematically kill all who opposed them in order to get power, but fallen beings can act in many different ways. There are some fallen beings that use violence. There are other fallen beings that never use violence, but they use deception. There are fallen beings that are very, very subtle at disguising themselves as being seemingly benevolent people, having good intentions, having accomplished something worthwhile for humanity.

This is where you need to go beyond belief, beyond human images, and use Christ discernment. Christ discernment, when you reach a certain level of discernment, you are looking beyond the outer images, the official story, even the human evaluation, and you are reading vibration. When you do this and read the vibration of Churchill and Roosevelt, you can see that one of the characteristics they had was they had a very fixed world view of how things should be, they were very convinced that that view was right, and they also had a certain willingness to compromise in order to further that worldview.

But again, it is not really that you could analyze the lives of Churchill and Roosevelt and see obvious signs that they were fallen beings. It is something you need to read at the level of vibration, and at the level of looking at that lifestream and where it came from.

Now, you also need to recognize that any teaching we give about fallen beings can be misinterpreted, and the fallen beings will attempt to misinterpret it. What we have attempted to do with the My Lives book is to give a very direct view of fallen beings as being very violent, very destructive. This is because this is how most people can most easily come to recognize that there are certain beings in embodiment who have no empathy, who have no humanity, no concern for the suffering of others.

But this does not thereby say that the view of fallen beings given in the My Lives book is complete, because there are many fallen beings who are much more subtle. You might say, in a certain way, they are not as destructive as what we describe in the My Lives book. You can see that Stalin was in a category of fallen beings that are very destructive.

Roosevelt and Churchill were in the category of fallen beings that are much more subtle and therefore, it is more difficult to recognize them. There are fallen beings who have been historical figures that most everybody look up to as being benevolent people who have done something important for humanity. There are some of these fallen beings that you can debate how destructive they are, how destructive their influence has been.

There are some fallen beings that have actually, as we even described with Maleve in the My Lives book, that have made some progress towards overcoming the fallen state of consciousness. Therefore, you cannot necessarily say that they are as destructive as Lucifer and Satan are portrayed in the book. There are some of them, that you could say they are close to overcoming the fallen state of consciousness, but they still have elements of that fallen state of consciousness that can cause them to make certain decisions, especially when they are in a position of power, that are not constructive.

You will see many times in world history, that there has been this category of these fallen beings who are not clearly destructive, for that matter do not necessarily have an evil intention, but they still have a certain mindset, where they are very fixated on seeing things a certain way. They are very, very convinced that they are right. So even though they are absolutely convinced that they are doing the right thing and doing what is best for humanity, it actually is not what is the optimal choice in the situation, and if somebody had been there with the Christ perspective, they would have acted differently.

What I specifically can mention in terms of the Yalta Conference was that Stalin used that conference to set up the later takeover by Russia, of the nations in Eastern Europe and the Baltics, and Roosevelt and Churchill more or less accepted this. You can debate how clearly they voiced that acceptance to Stalin, or whether he just interpreted it that way, but nevertheless they allowed the communist takeover of the Baltics and Eastern Europe.

This was not the only way it could have been done. There could have been people who would have taken a more firm stand and clearly demonstrated to Stalin that this was not acceptable and that they would not divide Europe into two halves. That means that you could have then avoided the communist takeover of Eastern Europe and the Baltics, which would have been the higher solution, clearly. There could still have been a cold war between the Soviet Union or Russia and the West, but at least the Iron Curtain would have been east of the Baltics and the Eastern European states and I think that if you could ask them, most people in those nations would have preferred that solution.


Copyright © 2019 Kim Michaels