Well yes, but I'm speaking about very directly stating one thing at one time and its opposite at another time, not some sort of ambiguous interpretation of the material as a whole. I'm only thinking of a few specific statements made early-on and contradicted later, and some odd statements during lectures, not any sort of vein of contradictions throughout the material or anything. Also they weren't particularly important. Anyway as I said it could be distortion on the part of the channel, or it could be fraud. The reason I'm not rejecting that possibility is because this is a Seth forum, and there are many people who reject Hicks just as there are many people who accept her, so to each their own of course. Jane had some early errors, but they were corrected later, and Seth spoke about distortion specifically. I wish Abraham would do that.
Yeah. Chriss is right that emotions will tell you if a particular train of thought is helpful or not, and following good-feeling thoughts will definitely get you to your destination - you can really do that and nothing else. I don't mean to make things more complex but it can be occasionally helpful to understand that belief is still primary regarding the generation of emotion.
Just a quick example, say you have a desire and you attempt some positive thoughts regarding it, but those thoughts just don't feel good to you for some reason. It turns out that you don't actually believe the desire to be possible for a variety of reasons. You discover and alter that belief and suddenly the same thoughts will feel completely different, even mere moments later, and of course now that the thought feels good you can use it to create what you want!
It's relevant to point out that although many means of discovering and changing beliefs involve emotion, you can use the mind's logical faculties to accomplish a belief change as well, such as through a series of questions in internal dialogue. So you can actually change the emotion a thought gives you moments apart via the logical faculties alone - emotion not involved - and I think this illustrates well the primary nature of belief. But you can definitely stick with the good-feeling-thoughts method the whole way through, with belief changes happening in the background. I think Abraham points this out quite well in many of the exercises at the end of Ask and It Is Given, and they definitely show how the same thought can feel completely different moments apart. They also involve just feeling fantastic and transferring that feeling of accomplishment/joy into other areas, something Seth recommends doing as well!
Bottom line I guess all I'm saying is, use the Abraham method, but if you get stuck not knowing why a thought that you'd like to feel good doesn't, don't be dismayed, you can keep moving forward by targeting the belief behind it using the same good-feeling-thoughts method (or a Seth method), and in so doing actually change your beliefs (whether you notice or not) and get to where that original thought of what you desire feels good.
(Writing this actually helped me see a ton of connections.)