I am thinking of starting my own "Church" to help those, in this reality, find their way to the 'next', and not get lost...  In that vein, I ask this question:

Who is Jesus?  (I mean from the Afterlife experiences.)  This question can be addressed directly to Bruce, himself!  I want to know, so I can better explain it.  Is Jesus the real Son of Man, or Son of God, as the Bible teaches/most Christian faiths?  Is He just one of the "Big Fish," or is there something more that we don't understand?  Obviously, he is atleast a "Big Fish".  Budda, the Prophets, the Dalai Lama, etc., are all probably "Big Fish," as well.  Right?  What about Mohammed?  In light of the current terrorism going on, was Mohammed a "Big Fish," or a Devil in Disguise?

Please Answer...   :)

Thank You.

Greetings Robert,

Welcome to this site!

The Jesus I met in the afterlife may differ from one met by someone else. Such an immense being as Christ has many aspects and speaks to each according to their need.

In my opinion, you might want to explore the Afterlife on your own so that your church will be grounded in your actual experiences.

Betson

This couldn't be more true what Bets said. The problems with religions and churches are always starting when people do things not because they themselves think they're right, but because others are telling them they are right, and what they should believe.

When you really want to help people, try to be good and happy, and then try to give your goodness and happieness to other people, too. Sermons about the "truth" of religious figures are not helpful, because everyone, in my view, has to gain one's own insights, and this is hindered by people telling them "the truth", so that the audience takes an opinion instead of making own experiences and thoughts.

Spooky

 Robert asks who and what Jesus really is?

 Justin replies:  After sliced bread, chocolate, and red wine, one the best things that has happened to humanity? :-X

There is great wisdom in the character of Jesus, there can be no doubt of it. Though I am not a Christian I do try to follow his example as best I can. Some days are better than others. I have an immense respect for the Christ Light and I listen and feel for it daily. BUT that being said, I am not even sure Jesus ever existed...I'm still working that one out and I'm glad I'm working it out rather than some preacher coaching me on what to believe. I don't say that to discourage you from your church, I just hope you will keep things open and free-- That's a church that would get my attention.

An astral thoughtform created by the energy of believers. When you go into the belief centres in the "afterlife" you can see that some religions' heavens are falling apart because they're not receiving energy anymore. Religions are imo designed to give your power away - by not having your own thoughts, by not making your own decision. Spiritual slavery, where the shackles are yours to make, or yours to break.

Simple. He told us.

"What I AM, you are. What I can do, you can do. This and more will you do."

It was not He who decided to start a church. It was Paul, the self-proclaimed disciple, the one who never met Jesus in the flesh.

Thomas

Yeah, I think that's the kicker for me too, Thomas. I"m not so sure Jesus would call himself a Christian, you know, I'm just not sure about that. I don't think that what Christianity is, is what he had in mind. I could be wrong and I'm sure I'll hear about it when I get where ever I'm headed, but Paul's story doesn't add up for me and I guess that's my whole problem with that religion and so far any religion that I've come across. If Jesus is the symbol for PUL I have no problem with that, but the way the church uses his image for garnering wealth and propagating fear of the "outsiders" is preposterous and yet it has gone on for 2000 years. Thanks for bringing up Paul is really all I wanted to say--

yours,
Beau

You might try reading this book by Deepak Chopra, it may answer some of your questions:
http://www.amazon.com/Third-Jesus-Christ-Cannot-Ignore/dp/0307338312

Aras

 Hey Robert,  

 I was joking earlier.  Sort of along Spooky's words, but also different.  I believe its fine to tell people your beliefs and opinions if you try to be respectful about it, realize you might not have the full and totally undistorted truth about something, and most importantly you encourage others to look within for answers.  

  With that said, you have the ability to go within and find out the truth for yourself.   I find it helpful to get relaxed, let go of any preconceptions, bring up a memory wherein you felt a lot of love--let that extend outward towards the rest of creation and inward at the same time, and ask/intend to get help and answers from the most helpful, spiritually/PUL developed/aware, and constructive sources there are within and without self.  
Also importantly try to feel gratitude for any and all answers and help received before hand.  

Now, also keeping the 1st paragraph in mind; this is briefly what and who I believe this character I prefer to call Yeshua is about.  My opinion, perceptions, and beliefs.  

Yes, in some ways Yeshua is just another "big fish" or big curl.  Yet, at the same time, his "Disk" or Greater Self, Spirit Essence, or what not and what we could call "Christ" is what Bruce perceived and labeled the Planning Intelligence, which we also may as well call the first concentrated awareness outside of Source of PUL.  

 Or what I or Cayce's work might call, the Co-Creator of this particular Universe or Galaxy.   And the first of those who "separated" from Source, to return fully (1st as a completed Disk...).
 
Kind of of the ultimate and longest Retriever around..   Again, i recommend going within under the above circumstances and looking for your own answers.  
So, yeah in many ways "just like us", and yet also somewhat unique in some ways as well.  You could say he was the genius par excellence of spirituality/PUL, and the first to accomplish what is all of our destiny.   I believe for that, and for his tireless service work trying to help out all stuck aspects of Creation, he deserves a lot of respect.  He is both a sibling to, and yet to many within this Universe, also a parent of our Disks.  

 If you want a more detailed synthesis from mostly non religious sources, and which all came together for me one night as a "rote" out of the blue after fasting a couple of days and while taking a relaxing bath, check out this link to another area of Bruce's afterlife site.   Read my posts that are towards the middle and go past somewhat.   It's quite an interesting picture when you compare the works of Monore, McKnights, (long time explorer with Monroe) Moens, Cayces, the N.T. (particularly John), and the Shroud of Turin research all together with an open mind/heart.

 I originally wrote this thread talking about the differing kinds of Resurrection, but turned more into a discussion about Yeshua:  
http://afterlife-knowledge.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1229455453/15#15

Hello Robert:

When it comes to figuring out who Jesus is, I figure the best results will come if a person tries to find out for his or her self, rather than relying on what other people have to say. The below is what I shared on another post.

Here's an example of receiving a clue about Christ before I tried to do so.

I was meditating and I saw the face of a man. He seemed to be in distress. I figured he needed retrievel help and spoke to him in such terms. Suddenly I found myself at the top of a cliff having a conversation with this man (non-physically).  I tried to get him to go to the light. He jumped off of the cliff and into the ocean below. I jumped in after him. I continued to talk to him while we were both under water. Next, we talked at the top of the cliff again.  Suddenly accross a bay to my left the image of Jesus appeared. Gold light radiated from Jesus and filled the landscape. The man I tried to help forgot all about me and floated to the shore where Jesus stood.

Here's another example.  Early on during my kundalini (creative aspect of being) unfoldment process I lay in bed awake one night, and suddenly I saw a lifesize image of a heavy metal rocker dude. I could see kundalini flowing within him. He said: "I use my kundalini for evil." Next, I saw a lifesize demonic image of myself. Next, I saw the face of Jesus Christ.  The message was clear. If I'm going to go through the kundalini unfoldment process, make certain that I do so with Christ consciousness/love in mind. Our creative energy can be used in different ways.

Another example, years ago I had what I refer as a night in heaven experience. At the time I was an atheist. I figured science had all the answers. Nevertheless, I found myself in higher realm one night. The happiness level was absolutely wonderful.  Not only did I understand that the afterlife exists, I completely understood how it was possible for it to exist without having to think about it.  I understood that everything works out wonderfully in the end. That our life of problems in this World isn't what life is really about. At the beginning of the experience I experienced the presence of Christ. I experienced his presence in a way where I didn't have to see his image. I understood without receiving any words that Christ is a key part of divine reality. It was an automatic knowing. There was nothing repressive about this. At the end of the experience I saw a star flash. I figure this star represented Christ.

It didn't take long for me to forget about the above experience. I forgot about it, just like some people forget about their near death experiences for a while.  After I made conscious contact with my higher self/spirit guidance, my memory of the above experience came back to me. I now remember it more completely than I did the days that followed the experience. I can't experience the full impact of the experience by thinking about it, but I am certain of this. When I had the experience I was absolutely certain about what I experienced and what I was understanding.

Here's an experience I had relating to Christ after I asked about him. One night I was reading a book by Elaine Pagels, and she wrote that the Gospel According to Thomas speaks of Jesus as if he was an enlightened being, the Gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke speak of him as if he is a messenger of God, and the Gospel of John speaks of him as if he is God incarnate. Before I went to sleep that night I prayed for a dream telling me which Gospel is true.

In the middle of the night I woke up from a drream, turned on my night lamp, and grabbed my dream journal and a pen, so I could write some notes. Before I could write anything I saw a light flash. I see spirits appear as points of light when I see them through my crown chakra. The light I saw on this occasion was much larger than any point of light I had seen before. It also radiated more energy than any point of light I had experienced before. It felt divine. It felt more real than the physical World. The thought occurred to me with a laugh, "And people don't believe in the World of spirit."

I put my note pad and pen away, turned off my night lamp, and lay on my side. I was overcome by the energy of the spirit that visited me. I didn't see nor hear Christ, but I inwardly understood that this was the spirit of Christ. His presence worked on my energetic system for about 15 minutes. It did so in a manner that is beyond how kundalini operates. Ever since, the energetic flow in my upper chakras has been more clear, balanced and alive.

I felt lots of love, grattitude, humility and reverences towards Christ as this took place. My belief is that the spirit of Christ knew how to find my energetic signature, and he extended a part of his spirit to my energy signature so it could be worked on. I had a number of follow up visitacions. On some occasions the energy would push towards my crown chakra so intensly, it felt like my head would come off. It is no longer necessary for such intensity to take place.

So which gospel is true? I don't know. Perhaps each is correct in its own way. The key is that the spirit of Christ can reach out to anybody he wants to reach out to. Perhaps, all a person needs to do is ask.

There have been a few occasions where the image of Jesus appeared to me as I received a message.

Volu:

What is your reason for concluding the below?  Does Val Valerian's books have anything to do with it?



Volu wrote on Jan 25^th, 2009 at 5:31am:

An astral thoughtform created by the energy of believers. When you go into the belief centres in the "afterlife" you can see that some religions' heavens are falling apart because they're not receiving energy anymore. Religions are imo designed to give your power away - by not having your own thoughts, by not making your own decision. Spiritual slavery, where the shackles are yours to make, or yours to break.

Regarding what Tgeks wrote:

One night I received a message that when Jesus was with this World he had divine authority. Then I received the message: "Paul too."

I couldn't tell you what Paul is about.  Some of his words seem right, there are a few that don't.  I don't know to what extent his words have been misrepresented. Some of the words attributed to him seem to be from his letters. Some might see Paul like a modern day preacher; however, preachers of today don't tend to have to go through what Paul went through. I'm not an expert from the time period, but it sure doesn't seem like it was safe to be a Christian preacher during Paul's time period. Therefore, perhaps Paul put his welfare on the line when he decided to preach.

Paul did get to meet some of Jesus' disciples.

I figure the divine powers that be had a pretty good idea what would happen after Jesus taught.  Some sort of vehicle was needed in order that his teachings would become known. If his teachings hadn't become known, people such as myself would not had learned about him. I used to follow the teachings of gurus. I found time after time that they aren't what they represent themselves to be. It wasn't until I made contact with spirit guidance, that I finally learned about a man who walked this earth that was indeed a master and didn't misrepresent himself. Not to say that there aren't any other teachers that I have respect for, but these other teachers don't misrepresent themselves as some kind of enlightened master. They simply share what they learned without suggesting that they are infallible, which is something you pretty much do when you refer to yourself as "enlightened," whatever that means.

If Jesus hadn't come along, other religions would've flourished instead. Is this actually preferable? If Islam would've spread instead, I don't know if we'd be free to have these conversations on the internet. I doubt that TMI would had come into existence, if the United States was an Islamic country.

Thomas:

Why do you believe the below is so? Perhaps during the 2,000 years or so since Christ a lot of people needed to be a part of church.  This could be true even for Christians who don't live their life in a positive way. Consider Sylvia from Bruce's books.  Because she chose to think of Jesus, she received help, rather than ending up in a lower realm.  Something similar happened for Howard Storm during his NDE. I help with retrievels in a way that is usual.  I help out while involved with daily activities. I can see some of the spirits that are involved as flashing points of light. Sometimes I see a blue oval of light and within it an image of Jesus can be seen. I'm not certain, but I believe this is what stuck spirits who call out for Jesus see. Why would they think to call out for Jesus if men like Paul didn't put in the effort he put in?



tgecks wrote on Jan 25^th, 2009 at 12:20pm:

Simple. He told us. "What I AM, you are. What I can do, you can do. This and more will you do." It was not He who decided to start a church. It was Paul, the self-proclaimed disciple, the one who never met Jesus in the flesh. Thomas

Deepak Chopra gave his stamp of approval to a couple of Jane Roberts Seth books that took three of Jesus' most famous sayings and reinterpreted them so they lacked spiritual value, and that came up with a detailed and ridiculous explanation for why Jesus supposedly wasn't crucified. This being the case, I wonder how much Deepak actually knows about the life of Christ?

My guess is that Deepak equates Christ with the gurus of the World and this isn't the case.





Aras wrote on Jan 25^th, 2009 at 12:49pm:

You might try reading this book by Deepak Chopra, it may answer some of your questions: http://www.amazon.com/Third-Jesus-Christ-Cannot-Ignore/dp/0307338312 Aras

 Hi Albert,

I oft get the sense that many more, somewhat open minded people, see Christianity in its various forms as far inferior to many other major belief systems.  Partly because of the various dogmas in same, the controlling/political history of the Church, and because of a percentage of a certain type or types of people that tend to get attracted to same.  

  Yet, someday, most will realize that real and true Christianity, which is sincerely practiced is the most expanded teaching and practice around on this Earth, BUT that one not need to necessarily call or think of themselves as "Christian" to practice and live in such a way.  

  At some point in their path, after doing enough of the above, they may find out just who and what this "Jesus" character was all really about.  Some will find out in their in-physical life, and many more in their Afterlife sojourns.  

 The important part is though, that they live in that manner, which Christ epitomized in his public life on Earth.  

 Plenty of belief systems, teachers, and what not in the Earth promote similar core beliefs as Yeshua did, but none had lived these Universal truths so purely and powerfully before him, and few if any public teachers since.  
I do believe there are others who have lived pretty close or the same though since he left the public scene, but that is partly because he created such a powerful ripple in the Quantum field making it easier for us to follow and accomplish that path within the physical Earth.  These don't seem to be public teachers as such, for whatever reason they keep a lower profile.  My guess is that they don't want another religion or belief system to spring up around them and their "miraculous" abilities and knowing.

 Most modern and historical public teachers that I've tuned into, while some of them I respect quite a bit, I don't get the sense that any of them were quite as intune and Source realized as he was in his public life.  This is not a criticism, or tying to belittle their efforts, just a plain statement of my intuition.

 Too many people imo emphasize what Tgecks emphasized, without the previous part of his words, "Because I go unto my Father and prepare a way, then shall you too..."  

 Yeah, pretty important part there that oft gets conveniently left out.   Very occasionally it bothers me somewhat how little respect there is for this person, this life, this example, and what he did for Whole/Total Self...but then i realize the above and that its more important how people live then what they specifically believe or don't believe.
And that many, even if its in the Afterlife, will at some moment realize just how important this life and example was.   Without it, and even the latter less pure interpretations (i.e. religion), we would be in much darker times indeed than we are.

 For those who emotionally dislike Christianity, and all things with a "Christian" label, that is a hard one to swallow, and somewhat understandably so.
In my youth, when i researched the history of Christianity and particularly the latter Roman influenced Church, well i didn't find much to like or respect.  In some respects that still holds true, BUT i have a more broad, holistic, and long term overview now which makes me realize certain important things about this whole question.

 And while I don't believe everything that Chopra says, isn't it more important that he speaks well of Yeshua and emphasizes the universality of Christ?   While i haven't read that whole book, i have skimmed it, and he seems to speak somewhat reverently about Christ and his life.  

 Yes, i'm with you in that i don't agree with his promotion of the Seth material, or using the old and shallow/1 dimensional characterization that Yeshua was just another enlightened Guru type, but again i think overall its more important that he speaks well of him and emphasizes the Universal nature of "Christ", or Christ Consciousness.  

 Why he would write a book with concepts that are actually fairly old and somewhat common in the New Age world and history, is another question.  

Well, speaking of Chopra and Jesus, I don't agree with everything he says either, but thought I'd post this article because of the questions asked why he would write this book.. etc...and I do believe that he knows quite a bit about the life of Christ.

Who is Jesus? He's three people, says Deepak Chopra
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Who is Jesus? According to spiritual guru Deepak Chopra, there are three interpretations.
In his book "The Third Jesus," published this week, Chopra says there is a "sketchy historical figure," a second "abstract theological creation" and a third Jesus with the highest level of enlightenment -- what Chopra calls God-consciousness.
"I want to offer the possibility that Jesus was truly, as he proclaimed, a savior," Chopra wrote. "Not the savior, not the one and only Son of God. Rather Jesus embodied the highest level of enlightenment.
"He spent his brief adult life describing it, teaching it, and passing it on to future generations," he said. "Jesus intended to save the world by showing others the path to God-consciousness."
Chopra, author of more than 50 books and head of the spiritual group Alliance for a New Humanity, describes God-consciousness as "a metaphor for a shift in consciousness that makes Jesus's teachings totally real and vital."
He said he began searching for the third Jesus as a child attending a Catholic Irish missionary school in India after being fascinated by what he described at the "most interesting, romantic, passionate, spiritual story of all time."
"Yet I was struck by the fact that my friends, who were part of the Church, had been indoctrinated into a belief system where guilt was actually a virtue and I couldn't quite come to terms with that," Chopra told Reuters in an interview.
"I said to myself there must be a third Jesus, a state of consciousness that I can actually relate to, and I started to really study the New Testament and the Bible," he said.
EAST MEETS WEST
Chopra paints this third Jesus as one of both Eastern and Western spirituality.
"Leave aside the differences in the language of it -- they are all talking about the same thing," he said. "So I hope in the very least it will contribute to some healing of the rift in our collective soul, which is the cause of all the wars and all the problems we're having today."
Chopra said the Jesus created by the Catholic Church was confusing because although the religion had done a lot of good in the world, it had also taken part "in the Crusades, in witch hunts, in burning people on the stake, homophobia, depriving women of their rights, all kinds of things."
"The present day crisis in Christianity is it's bogged down in issues like -- what would Jesus do? They make pronouncements on things like abortion, women's rights, homophobia, stem cell research -- nothing to do with Christ," he said.
"It influences our politics, it influences our national policy, it influences whether we go to war or not in the name of God," he said. "It's inanity of the utmost extreme."
Chopra said he hoped readers would take away a practical way to understand the New Testament and understand that engaging in contemplative meditation can lead to positive change.
"Everything changes for the good," he said. "The way we think, the way we behave, the way we feel, the way we have our personal relationships, our social interactions, our environment all changes in an evolutionary direction because we have shifted in our own consciousness."
And that, he said "is precisely what is meant by the kingdom of heaven is within you."

I haven't read Chopra's book, but I watched some of his PBS show that is based upon his books about Jesus. Much of what he said relates to what Aras just posted.  Hopefully, overall, what Chopra wrote will be helpful. Perhaps I shouldn't of written the post I wrote about Chopra.

Regarding abortion, I don't know what Jesus' feelings are about the matter. I don't know what the answer to the matter is. It's a complicated subject. Here are some thoughts:

1. Chances are that a soul won't incarnate into a fetus that will probably be aborted.

2. Nevertheless, since consciousness seems to be everywhere, does a fetus experience pain? Perhaps horrific pain.

3. It is possible that the consciousness of an incarnating soul merges with the consciousness of a body. What happens to the consciousness of a body if a soul never merges with it?

4. A part of growing in love, is getting to the point where you always choose according to love, rather than according to what is convenient.  If a person takes part in an abortion without "actually" knowing whether it is okay for abortions to take place, perhaps he or she places convenience before love.

5. It would be considered a crime to kill a baby right after it is born. Is it different to kill a fetus. Perhaps the answer is contained in the above.

Regarding how some Christians judge homosexuals, I don't agree with their doing so. I got really annoyed when proposition 8 was passed in California.

As it would be a church you start I think it important that you decide who this Jesus is and how his existence is important to you and those who you desire to have follow or to be in agreement with you. I am always concerned when someone whats to start a church and have it "their" church. A fellow named Don spoke of "his church" here and I must admit it did disturb me somewhat. Shouldn't the church be Jesus church or even better, the "Creators"? I personally believe its just fine to open your own, as long as its not about being "yours" and its more about being about the love.

As for Mohammad,...open your heart and know the answer. Is he any less than any of the others you mentioned? Would you think that people who proclaim to follow his ideals be worse that those who say they have followed the ideals of Jesus or God and done as bad or worse than he?

Hawkeye:

I believe you're making the below comment without really knowing. I did open my heart and as I've explained before, I've had experiences that reflect Christ in a very positive way.  

If you want to find out what Christ is about, pray with an open mind and heart and find out. Don't just spout opinions and make meaningless comparisons that are based more upon what bugs you rather than what you have found out. You don't do yourself or anybody else a favor when you do so. The below is the sort of thing people come up with when they read books like Conversations with God.


hawkeye wrote on Jan 27^th, 2009 at 8:12pm:

As for Mohammad,...open your heart and know the answer. Is he any less than any of the others you mentioned? Would you think that people who proclaim to follow his ideals be worse that those who say they have followed the ideals of Jesus or God and done as bad or worse than he?

Everybody is making great points here. Me? I'm tired of the spin on Christianity and the other major religions. I'm not tired of Jesus, just tired of having people who don't know, say that they do, because of Jesus. Invoking Jesus is not an answer, but I do believe that knowing Jesus on a personal level is an answer or at least it provides one with a pathway that seems very legitimate to me. And please don't get me wrong--Justin and Albert. I would never lump you guys into that group. But I admit that I have become conditioned to rebel. I hate the way Christianity forsakes the feminine. I don't buy it because of that. But that being said-- I don't believe that Jesus forsakes the feminine at all, but the people who have written about him did and that irks me. I want to know Jesus, but I have no desire to follow Christianity at this moment. Who knows though, I may read something in here in the next few weeks and completely change again. It's an awesome thread--Thanks a ton to all.

Beau

recoverer,
"What is your reason for concluding the below? Does Val Valerian's books have anything to do with it?"

My perspectives are based on experiences, and that which I cannot validate yet, but sounds right. I haven't read any books by Valerian. The M5 series is published by Val.

recoverer,
"Regarding abortion, I don't know what Jesus' feelings are about the matter. I don't know what the answer to the matter is."

But does it really matter what jesus or the neighbour would feel or think about this subject?

"1. Chances are that a soul won't incarnate into a fetus that will probably be aborted."
"2. Nevertheless, since consciousness seems to be everywhere, does a fetus experience pain? Perhaps horrific pain."

I think chances are a spirit doesn't connect with the fetus inside the womb. First breath sounds more reasonable to me. I don't  know about pains of a fetus, but I do know there are lots of ways for a spirit to leave a body. Maybe an incarnation eats right and stays fit according to health experts, but is then run over by a garbage truck while having a breather from jogging. The blood might then be washed away, and the remains burnt and the ashes flushed down the nearest toilet. I wouldn't mind nor care; I'd be having fun on the astral, free from the restraints of that body.

"3. It is possible that the consciousness of an incarnating soul merges with the consciousness of a body. What happens to the consciousness of a body if a soul never merges with it?"

I think it's possible that if a spirit doesn't connect to a body, the outcome will be a stillborn body, as the force that gives the body life isn't present.

"4. A part of growing in love, is getting to the point where you always choose according to love, rather than according to what is convenient.  If a person takes part in an abortion without "actually" knowing whether it is okay for abortions to take place, perhaps he or she places convenience before love."

How does one choose according to love? What is the love above anyway, and why does it make demands?

"5. It would be considered a crime to kill a baby right after it is born. Is it different to kill a fetus. Perhaps the answer is contained in the above."

I think the ultimate killer (of bodies) is my greater self, deciding when in the timeline my incarnations start, what to experience, and when and how they end.

"Regarding how some Christians judge homosexuals, I don't agree with their doing so. I got really annoyed when proposition 8 was passed in California."

The christians I've heard grumble at gay orientation blame it on the will of their god.

I am, & in this Church, will be, always seeking the REAL truth...

What is the REAL truth?

The Catholics, (in which I was raised), say one thing, the Methodists, Baptists, etc., etc., another.  One of them is right!  Or, maybe, none of them are...   :o

My "Proposed" name for this Church is The Reality Church of Jesus Christ, and it will seek the REAL truth, no matter what it really is, or where it comes from.  Won't really be "My" Church, or anybody's Church, but just one that seeks the REAL truth...  Jesus, in the Gospels, said Judge the Spirits by their fruits, (i.e. - Good Spirits = good fruits/works; Bad Spirits = bad fruits/works).  That's all I really have to go on!!  I have heard, from whatever source, that the Emperor Constantine in 312 A.D., in adopting Christianity/Catholicism as the Church of Rome, paganized the whole of Christianity!  If Paul formed the "Christian" Church, did he do it under God's, (Jesus'), approval, or not?  Back to the question:  What would Jesus do?  -  Exactly who is this Jesus we read about?   :)

See:  My "small" efforts, so far, at:  www.myspace.com/the_reality_church.  I may be "Off," but I'm trying!!  Any suggestions?

I am basing it's, the Church's, precepts on Old Testament & New Testament logic, atleast for right now!!  THE TEN COMMANDMENTS & The Beatitudes, which appear to be Universal Truths, but do support the government...  "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and give to God what is God's!" - Jesus

Thank you.

Robert

The one truth is spherical, like a globe. It's not unknowable, but it is seen from many different perspectives and that's why it is so tedious to define for everyone.

Many people including myself have experienced differently. Information about Christ was presented to me in a progressive manner which shows that he isn't just some collective mind dream creation.

It is important to be discriminitive about whom we receive information from. Even though for the most part I communicate with friendly spirits, occasionally an unfriendly spirit will try to mislead me. It isn't always easy to tell when this is taking place.


Volu wrote on Jan 28^th, 2009 at 11:31am:

recoverer, "What is your reason for concluding the below? Does Val Valerian's books have anything to do with it?" My perspectives are based on experiences, and that which I cannot validate yet, but sounds right. I haven't read any books by Valerian. The M5 series is published by Val.

Checked out your website, Robert. I don't really see anything new there, to be honest with you, but the music is sweet. I"m not a Hell Fire person and I get the impression from your site that you believe it is your duty to save people or to inform them of an ideology that is already quite abundant out there in the ether and I suppose that is admirable taken on its own.

You say Jesus is neither black or white and a few other things, but Jesus is also neither male or female, at least that's how I see it and if Paul had picked up on that I think things would be much different today. Jesus was rebelling against much of what is still taken to heart in Christian doctrine.

Personally, and I say this with love I assure you, I don't think you've hit the mark on who Jesus is...at least not to me. And of course I'm not the best judge as I'm not even sure he existed on the earthly plane, but I do accept the Christ light--because I can't come up with a better term for what it is. I know the LIGHT exists, but what you're discussing, with all the fear of hell stuff and get saved, I think is a misunderstanding that has permeated the last 2000 years. Good luck to you on your quest, Robert. It is a hardy undertaking to say the least. And I'm offering my opinion because you asked for it, but I'm not in need of a reply that explains why I'm wrong. My best to you and your family, sir. I am enjoying this thread immensely.

Yours Allways,

Beau

recoverer wrote on Jan 28^th, 2009 at 1:46pm:

Many people including myself have experienced differently. Information about Christ was presented to me in a progressive manner which shows that he isn't just some collective mind dream creation.

 Similar here. I've been shown repeatedly in various ways (via dreams, meditation info, gut feelings, etc) that Yeshua lived an in-physical life, overall pretty similar to what the N.T. outlines.  That he was so intune with PUL and Source, he could manipulate physical "reality" fairly easily (compared to most humans then and now).

 Besides us, those who also believe he was in-physical and a great spiritual teacher are Rosiland McKnights guidance during her time with Monroe at TMI, Edgar Cayce, Bruce Moen, and many other more credible and helpful sources.  

While Bob Monroe doesn't outright say it, seems like he too from various clues figured out just who and what Yeshua and his Disk was. For example in his 3rd book, his meeting with the still in-physical being after some 1800 years "He/She".   There are repeated clues to the real identity of "He/She" and that it very well may be Yeshua.  In another of Monroe's books he shares a "channeling" which is obviously from Christ.  In his first book, he wonders about "Gods Son", when a peculiar and powerful experience happens multiple times to him no matter "where" he was in the nonphysical.  

Quote:

It is important to be discriminitive about whom we receive information from. Even though for the most part I communicate with friendly spirits, occasionally an unfriendly spirit will try to mislead me. It isn't always easy to tell when this is taking place.

 Sooo true! And cannot be emphasized enough imo.  Just because one taps into the nonphysical in some manner, doesn't mean the info and sources from same are accurate, helpful, or true (and these run in degrees anyways depending).   There are many interweaving factors and variables that go into 1. the purity and accuracy of info we get and the sources we tap into, and 2. our interpretation and translation of whatever info we do get from whatever source.  

 Re: 1, this is why i always tell people two main things in encouraging them to explore.   What i say is similar to what Bruce says in the PUL method he talks about.  Bringing up a memory when you felt a lot of love.  
 Then, its very important and helpful to ask and intend to get help and info from only those sources which are the most spiritually mature/PUL developed and helpful/creative sources there are within and without self.  

 If one follows RAM's affirmation, one is potentially setting themselves up for tapping into somewhat misleading or ignorant sources.  Particularly because of the part wherein he states, I desire help and assistance from those beings who are at or beyond my developement (paraphrased, because from memory).   Even the great Monroe was mislead here and there, or at other times misinterpreted the good info from good sources he got.  

 Why?  It's a question of (meta) physics in a sense, and of static.  The more we ourselves are aligned to Source and PUL and vibrate in resonance with same, the less static (which equals distortion) is present.    This is a question partly of ones overall spiritual developement AND whatever happens to be ones more temporary state within any given moment of seeking info.    

One could be a rather spiritually developed person, but having an "off day" and seek info within that unbalance, and therefore pick up on info and sources which are not as helpful, accurate, etc. for Like attracts, begets, and resonates with Like ever.  So the info one gets is likewise imbalanced or the interpretations skewed.  

  This question of nonphysical tapping in, is a very complex and mult-faceted one, and as mentioned has many variables and considerations to consider.   It is rather "relative" depending.  

 This is why it is always good to question outside sources, and even the sources one is tapping into when going within.   Because of this complexity and relativity, this is why Yeshua gave a general yardstick for things of such nature, "you will know them by their fruits."   Those who have inner peace, joy, clarity, and love, and who foster same around them generally are good sources to trust and listen too.   That doesn't mean such sources won't speak unpopular ideas or beliefs, or try to go along with whatever crowd they are dealing with.

  Volu supports those like David Icke, and while i don't demonize him like some do, i see a lot of emphasis on the negatives, the problems, on fear, and little emphasis on the solutions in his work.  I see a seeking of notoriety.  

 We do not find such in the sources i mentioned in the above.  Always consider the deeper aspects, what a source aligns to more than not, etc.  

Regarding misleading beings, one time I was shown a white ball of light. This ball was made up of many bits of white light that represented souls that are a part of the oneness/greater good. A few bits of light flicked off of the ball of light and into the darkness. I heard a male voice say: "They thought they were more important."

I have received a couple of other visual messages that made the same point. There are beings who have considered themselves more important than the oneness/greater good/divine will. In each case I was shown an image which made the point that only a minimal number of souls have chosen to separate themselves from the light. I figure some of these souls are former human spirits, some are beings of another nature.

I believe that sometimes people have a problem with Christ, because they think of him as some sort of authority figure, and they don't like authority. Perhaps a better way to think of Christ is that he serves divine will, and divine will is about what serves the oneness/greater good.

Even though I believe that for the most part we make contact with spirits on a like attracts like basis, there are some exceptions. Therefore, we should be careful about who we are communicating to, or who we receive information from. If either a human or non-human source makes information available because this source is interested in serving itself rather than the oneness/greater good, then by humoring this source and saying things such as "the information is important, not the source," we give power and livelihood to a source that doesn't serve the oneness/greater good/divine will.  

Justin,
"Volu supports those like David Icke, and while i don't demonize him like some do, i see a lot of emphasis on the negatives, the problems, on fear, and little emphasis on the solutions in his work.  I see a seeking of notoriety."

Some of what he presents I find interesting, other stuff he says doesn't sit with me. I see him as individual who shares information about the bullies and their control schemes in the schoolyard. I see Monroe as one who shared his experiences of what's outside the schoolyard, and ultimately some good pointers to the question of "Who am I?".

"We do not find such in the sources i mentioned in the above.  Always consider the deeper aspects, what a source aligns to more than not, etc."

Dark. Light. Balance.

What do you think the following aligns to - Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. Nope: there's no eye in team, and besides, the dentist is on vacation. Turn the other cheek. Yep: he took your plates, now give him your dishwasher too.

Recoverer wrote: "4. A part of growing in love, is getting to the point where you always choose according to love, rather than according to what is convenient.  If a person takes part in an abortion without "actually" knowing whether it is okay for abortions to take place, perhaps he or she places convenience before love."

Volu responded: "How does one choose according to love? What is the love above anyway, and why does it make demands?"

Recoverer responds: "It isn't a matter of what love demands. It is a matter of what a person needs to do in order to experience and live according to love.  If a person makes rationalizations for self-centered activity, he or she will define his or her self accordingly. For example, if for the sake of physical pleasure a man decides to define women as pieces of meat to be used sexually, how will he be able to experience their spirit selves? Perhaps there is something to the as you sow so you reap principle. Many people who have found themselves in lower realms after their death, have found this principle to be true."

Recoverer, I am not belittling Jesus. It seams that your heart is closed to the possibility of others being equal to... or even perhaps bigger than he. That could be construed as  pretty closed mined or show a lack of true understanding of God and of love let alone the message Jesus expressed. Perhaps, by opening up your heart more you will begin to understand that many differant people have followed a God consciousness and have and were able to express a message of good over evil. There are far more than just Jesus. Your statement to me show hate, and a disrespect for others beliefs, and that only what you believe and think could be truth. My heart is open to love of not only this man named Jesus but to the All. You seem to think that's wrong for some reason. Perhaps there are some things you have missed and might serve you well to reflect upon. Perhaps even the messages from Jesus himself.
Robert, You do what you know to be right. Open your mind to truth and to love to include all possabilities. Don't close your mind as many will want you to. Your love of God/Creater will show through like a beacon.
Joe      

Hawkeye:

I figure there are lots of wonderful light beings and just about all of us are destined to become light beings like Christ. I figure this is what he has in mind. Nevertheless, this doesn't mean that everybody who has claimed to be a spiritual master was a high level spiritual master. Many have made the claim without being a master. I agree with Justin in that for the most part, people who have reached a high level of being aren't well known. They do their thing behind the scenes. I believe it is important to be discerning about who is authentic and who isn't.

I believe it was wrong for me to use the word "meaningless." I apologize for doing so.


hawkeye wrote on Jan 29^th, 2009 at 1:31pm:

Recoverer, I am not belittling Jesus. It seams that your heart is closed to the possibility of others being equal to... or even perhaps bigger than he. That could be construed as  pretty closed mined or show a lack of true understanding of God and of love let alone the message Jesus expressed. Perhaps, by opening up your heart more you will begin to understand that many differant people have followed a God consciousness and have and were able to express a message of good over evil. There are far more than just Jesus. Your statement to me show hate, and a disrespect for others beliefs, and that only what you believe and think could be truth. My heart is open to love of not only this man named Jesus but to the All. You seem to think that's wrong for some reason. Perhaps there are some things you have missed and might serve you well to reflect upon. Perhaps even the messages from Jesus himself. Robert, You do what you know to be right. Open your mind to truth and to love to include all possabilities. Don't close your mind as many will want you to. Your love of God/Creater will show through like a beacon. Joe

 And is your heart so open and PUL attuned Joe/Hawkeye that you should be speaking on the lacks within others whom you don't know very well?

 My belief is that Albert is speaking from experience and a deep knowingness when it comes to Yeshua, and less from intellect, "what he would like to believe", and theory that many speak from.  

 From my perspective, all beings are essentially and potentially equal, its just that some in their spiritual developement have gone far beyond others, and thus are better sources.  There are plenty others who have remembered pure Source Consciousness again, and they like Christ are true Co-Creators.

  Albert sees animals for instance with so much respect and equality, that he doesn't think its ok to kill or torture them for shallow, temporal, and materialistic/hedonistic pleasures.  

 What about you?

 When you really walk the walk more purely and on all levels, and not just talk the talk, then can you righteously speak on the lacks within your siblings even as He occasionally did, BUT with real Love in His heart.  I sense little love in your words to Albert, but more mischaracterization than anything else.

Volu wrote on Jan 28^th, 2009 at 4:38pm:

Dark. Light. Balance. What do you think the following aligns to - Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. Nope: there's no eye in team, and besides, the dentist is on vacation. Turn the other cheek. Yep: he took your plates, now give him your dishwasher too.

 So Volu, there is something lacking or limiting in the notion of self sacrifice for the greater good of the All?  And to return positivity to those who hand you negativity?  

To me, that is the highest form of PUL, which Yeshua, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, and some others here and there epitomized.

 Those with a very strong sense of the little self, of course do not like, understand, or vibe well with what is to them such silly notions.   And this is  part of why many of these so dislike Yeshua and his example.

 Again, it follows the Like attracts, begets, likes and resonates with Like energy law.  

Many people end up following others. That's what followers do. I believe it important to move yourself in a direction that brings you closer to the God consciousness/All. If that movement takes you through the belief in Jesus, Mohammad, Krishna, whomever...its the right direction. I love Jesus. My heart is open to his greatness. My heart is also open to Krishna, Mohammad, and ....Their teachings about love and God were all important. None less than the other. Jesus lessons, we are told, relate to the greatness of God and what is expected of us to honer him(God), our families, and ourselves. I don't remember ever seeing a message from Jesus about desiring he (Jesus)  being the focus. Your full of goodness Albert. Your love of Jesus is strong and good. I have also met with Jesus, and know him in my heart. His message to me is that the glory goes to God/Creator not to him. That others carry this message. That an open heart will led you home to him (God/Creator). Along with a multitude of other lessons that would take pages to fill. And that these lession are my lessons. Given to me in order for me to progress.
I am happy that you have found your truth. That your truth is Jesus. I believe there is more than just one truth.
Joe

Hawkeye:

Robert asked about Jesus, and some of us spoke about Jesus. If Robert would've asked about somebody else, we might've spoken about somebody else.

Robert:

Please ask about Joe (Hawkeye), so we can speak about him. :)


hawkeye wrote on Jan 29^th, 2009 at 2:52pm:

Many people end up following others. That's what followers do. I believe it important to move yourself in a direction that brings you closer to the God consciousness/All. If that movement takes you through the belief in Jesus, Mohammad, Krishna, whomever...its the right direction. I love Jesus. My heart is open to his greatness. My heart is also open to Krishna, Mohammad, and ....Their teachings about love and God were all important. None less than the other. Jesus lessons, we are told, relate to the greatness of God and what is expected of us to honer him(God), our families, and ourselves. I don't remember ever seeing a message from Jesus about desiring he (Jesus)  being the focus. Your full of goodness Albert. Your love of Jesus is strong and good. I have also met with Jesus, and know him in my heart. His message to me is that the glory goes to God/Creator not to him. That others carry this message. That an open heart will led you home to him (God/Creator). Along with a multitude of other lessons that would take pages to fill. And that these lession are my lessons. Given to me in order for me to progress. I am happy that you have found your truth. That your truth is Jesus. I believe there is more than just one truth. Joe

AKA, We have had the conversation re meat. Your belief that we should not eat meat is just fine with me, but you forget yet again that plants are living things also. Yet you are more than willing to kill and eat them. You believe they are less than other living things. How wrong you are, in my view. You judge me because I eat meat. I have connected with the All, through a plant and know, without doubt, that plants are life, no less than an animal or ourselves.
Now as for my heart being so open and attuned.... well its open to differant possibilities. Its a start. Just like you, Albert, and everyone else who visits this site and posts comments, I do judge. I do have an opinion. I don't feel any more "pure" than anyone else. You sit in judgment of me and what you believe me to think. You are welcome to your "opinion". You have a right to one. Just as I have. Walk the walk, talk the talk. Look inside yourself AKA. That's where judgment starts and will finish.      

I thank you for the Jesus love conchesness you send my way Recoverer. It reflects how close to him you truly are. Everyone is more than welcome to talk about me, if that is your wish Albert. All this time I thought he was talking about opening a church. Silly me.
Joe

Uh y'all, it's a discussion not a Holy War...sheesh.

Beau,
I was just going to type  YIKES!!!!!  but your post beat me to it!

:) Aras

Robbert, Sorry for the direction the thread has moved. As I said before, ...do what you know is right in your heart. Just ignore the arguing between us juveniles. My point was the importance of spreading God's word.  That many have done just that. That Jesus was only one of them and yes, even Muhammad did good things. Open a center of "Faith". Does it really matter if the good word came from Jesus, Mohammad, Krishna, whomever, or that it came and hearts are opened to it.
Joe

When I see crops being grown so they can be eaten, they seem to be grown in conditions that are quite similar to the conditions they normally grow in. In fact, they seem to get more attention than usual. They probably don't need pesticides. Better for us and them if we eat organic.

When it comes to animals, each year, about 6.5 billion souls have to incarnate into the lives of animals that are raised in cruel conditions so they can be eaten. Because they have nervous systems just like human beings have nervous systems (unlike plants) they experience pain.

Chickens and Eggs:
-Chicks have their sensitive beaks cut off without any painkillers.
-Chickens spend their entire lives in filthy, ammonia-laden sheds with tens of thousands of other birds. They are dosed with a steady stream of drugs and bred to grow so large so fast that many become crippled under their own weight or suffer organ failure.
-Many chickens suffer form chronic respiratory diseases, weakened immune systems, and bronchitis.
-After six weeks in these horrible conditions, the birds are roughly thrown into cages that are stacked on the back of a truck, and then they are shipped through all weather extremes to the slaughterhouse.

At slaughter, workers violently grab them and hang them upside down by their legs, which they force into shackles, breaking many of them in the process. Then their throats are slit.

-Birds who are raised for their eggs are packed, five to 11 at a time, into wire cages that are so small that they don't have enough room to spread even a single wing. Their wings and legs atrophy from disuse, and their legs and feet become deformed from standing on slanted wire cage bottoms. The tip of each hen's sensitive beak is cut off with a burning-hot blade. After about two years of confinement, they are violently pulled from their cages and shipped to slaughter. Their bodies are already so battered and emaciated that they can only be used for soup or companion animal food. Male chicks are worthless to the egg industry and it kills millions of newborn male chicks every year.

Pigs:
-Are castrated, have hunks of flesh cut from their ears, bits of their teeth cut off with wire cutters, and their tails chopped off—all without any painkillers.

Sometimes, the stalls they are confined to are stacked, and excrement form the pigs in the upper tiers falls onto those below.

They spend their entire lives in crates so small that they can't even turn around. Many pigs go insane from extremely crowded conditions in factory farms and compulsively chew on the bars of their pens.

420,000 pigs a year arrive crippled at the slaughterhouse, and another 1 million arrive dead from the journey. Because so many are killed at a time, it is hard to insure that they have actually been stunned to death when they are placed into scalding-hot water tanks that are intended to soften their skin and remove their hair. Therefore, they are boiled to death.

The same is true for other animals such as cows, but my post is getting too long.

Perhaps a movie about this subject should be made and called "An Inconvenient Truth" or has that title already been chosen?

We wouldn't treat human souls in the above manner simply because we eat vegetables, so why treat animal souls in such a manner?

Okay Joe:

I see the future, and you'll be a beautiful, vast and wonderful light being who abides in the oneness with God and many souls. However, before you get there, you'll have to spend some time checking passports as Disks attempt to wink out to wherever they wink out too.


hawkeye wrote on Jan 29^th, 2009 at 3:38pm:

I thank you for the Jesus love conchesness you send my way Recoverer. It reflects how close to him you truly are. Everyone is more than welcome to talk about me, if that is your wish Albert. All this time I thought he was talking about opening a church. Silly me. Joe

Beau and Aras, nothing wrong with a little passion. If people never had passion, where would the human race be?

How about people who take part in public protest? Should they be thrown in jail for being too fervent?

If anything bugs me, it's when people tell me and other people that we don't have the right to be passionate about something. Should we just stick our heads in the sand?

Justin,
"So Volu, there is something lacking or limiting in the notion of self sacrifice for the greater good of the All? And to return positivity to those who hand you negativity?"

Yes, I think so; turning the other cheek - allowing the abuse to continue. No victim, no victimizer. Clearly a difference of opinion, but there you go. :)

I am a beautiful, vast, and wonderful light being, just like yourself, already. Passports seam to phyical but I know there will be many more things for me to accomplish before I will be winking out. Thank you for your thoughts and your vision of my future.

Your still wrong about the vegetables though. ;) Plants are more than just their phyical bodies. (sound familiar?)Their souls are a developed as your, mine, and the animals. Its been proven that thought effect their growth. Love helps them grow also. Plants showin hate or other lower emotions do not do as well as ones that are showin love. For the animals, sacrifice in an effort to help others is not all that bad. I am sure they make that choice with an open mind. Perhaps their choice of sacrifice may allow them to move further in their progression and towards an opportunity to a live as a higher beings? I don't think we have a right to say if their choice of life existence is right or wrong. I don't begrudge anyone not eating meat. Its a personal choice. I won't be kicked our of any heaven for munching on a burger or eating an order of hot wings. Mind you, I wont be going to any heavens that meat eating, on this plain, is going to be a problem. And hopefully any stays, if I think I need them. in a F25 or 26 heaven/hell will be short lived.
Thanks Albert for making me look within. And you also AKA, for reaffirming where you stand.
Joe  

Perhaps many souls incarnate into difficult lifetimes in this World both human and non human not because it is desirable to do so, but because this World keeps creating such lifetimes. For example, if an abusive parent decides to change his or her abusive way, a soul won't have to take on the difficulty of being abused.


What does "AKA" stand for?




hawkeye wrote on Jan 29^th, 2009 at 5:00pm:

I am a beautiful, vast, and wonderful light being, just like yourself, already. Passports seam to phyical but I know there will be many more things for me to accomplish before I will be winking out. Thank you for your thoughts and your vision of my future. Your still wrong about the vegetables though. ;) Plants are more than just their phyical bodies. (sound familiar?)Their souls are a developed as your, mine, and the animals. Its been proven that thought effect their growth. Love helps them grow also. Plants showing hate or other lower emotions do not do as well as ones that are showin love. For the animals, sacrifice in an effort to help others is not all that bad. I am sure they make that choice with an open mind. Perhaps their choice of sacrifice may allow them to move further in their progression and towards an opportunity to a live as a higher beings? I don't think we have a right to say if their choice of life existence is right or wrong. I don't begrudge anyone not eating meat. Its a personal choice. I won't be kicked our of any heaven for munching on a burger or eating an order of hot wings. Mind you, I wont be going to any heavens that meat eating, on this plain, is going to be a problem. And hopefully any stays, if I think I need them. in a F25 or 26 heaven/hell will be short lived. Thanks Albert for making me look within. And you also AKA, for reaffirming where you stand. Joe

Recoverer,
"It isn't a matter of what love demands. It is a matter of what a person needs to do in order to experience and live according to love."

Needs to, and live according to, for me signifies demand (control). But I'm aware this is on the brink of heading into the world of hair-splitting. :P

"If a person makes rationalizations for self-centered activity, he or she will define his or her self accordingly."

In my experience some folks who say they want greater good, service to others, when explaining what that means to them, they say others are wrong and want to save (control) them.

Random kindess, like helping an old geezer across the street, without a need for an audience to see it, is cool, but I think sometimes an action is made in the hope that somebody will like you better, not because you're love incarnated.

"For example, if for the sake of physical pleasure a man decides to define women as pieces of meat to be used sexually, how will he be able to experience their spirit selves?"

Lust - lacking the spiritual/mental connection. An experience, and yet the greater self is still the greater self, and an exp. females are as likely to have as males. A white t-shirt with puppies and a heart on it doesn't tell the whole story.

"Perhaps there is something to the as you sow so you reap principle. Many people who have found themselves in lower realms after their death, have found this principle to be true."

Well, maybe it's sort of like they made wooden horses that turned out to be quite shite, and that's their responsibility, but they learnt a lot from making the first ones, and can now use that knowledge making other ones.

aka = Justin aka asltaomr
I tend to get a little lazy when typing. I have also gotten Justin's name wrong a few times and aka has been understood, I believe, as being him.
Joe

Recoverer wrote: "It isn't a matter of what love demands. It is a matter of what a person needs to do in order to experience and live according to love."

Volu responded: "Needs to, and live according to, for me signifies demand (control). But I'm aware this is on the brink of heading into the world of hair-splitting. :P"

Recoverer responds: "I figure a person "NEEDS" to make the right choices if he or she wants to live according to love. Hopefully this won't get into "what's right" because moral relatavism tends to be misguided and not sophisticated as some people seem to believe. Moral relatavism suggests that a person can't listen to his or her conscious, common sense and heart, and see what actually is right. I believe that false channeled sources are greatly responsible for moral relatavism. They get people to believe that just about anything is okay.

Some people want to associate love with freedom. This is okay, but I believe that true freedom goes along with responsible behavior. "

Okay this isn't on the subject but it kind of is. Is there food one can eat on a low cholesterol diet that still provides the protein without the carbs. I have to lose like 30 more pounds and I have been following low carb rules and losing weight and seeing a drop in cholesterol too, but I can't do it with no meat I don't think, but I'm willing to try after reading albert's post if someone can direct me to a viable source for such a diet. Oh yeah no wheat and no sugar at all.

Beau:

Vegetarian diets have a lot more protein than people tend to believe. In fact, some vegetable sources have more protein than meat on a pound by pound basis, because meat has so much fat. I've found that if you eat healty, and I mean lots of fruits and Vegies with starches to the minimun, you can lose weight without doing something faddish and limiting yourself to small amounts of Food.

In addition to vegies, Legumes (beans and lentils), nuts, tempeh (a soy product that is superior to tofu), and quinoa (a grain) can be good sources of protein.

You might have to take a vitamin B-12 supplement, because vegetarian diets don't provide.

Salads and steamed vegetables are better than fried vegetables. Stay away from creamy dressings.



Beau wrote on Jan 29^th, 2009 at 5:55pm:

Okay this isn't on the subject but it kind of is. Is there food one can eat on a low cholesterol diet that still provides the protein without the carbs. I have to lose like 30 more pounds and I have been following low carb rules and losing weight and seeing a drop in cholesterol too, but I can't do it with no meat I don't think, but I'm willing to try after reading albert's post if someone can direct me to a viable source for such a diet. Oh yeah no wheat and no sugar at all.

Thanks, that sounds doable. Sometimes I just need to see it in writing before I can commit to it. Thanks again for a very enlightening "get off the meat" post.

And I'm all for passion in discussion..but for awhile I really thought we were headed for a train wreck of intentions.

Well, I don't think we are made to live lifetimes here because this world keeps creating them, plant, and animal. I believe we make the choice to incarnate or not. To learn from the experience of living a life or not. There are important lessons to learn from being a plant as well as being an animal. And existing as a plant no less important or less fulfilling and meaningful than as a human. There is no being forcing us to live these lifetimes. No one but ourselves judging how we have lived once we die. But those are only my beliefs and everyone has the right to have their own. Well except those who believe that some one or something else will be making that choice for them. This is where I have some problem with many organised religions. The need to control the actions and thoughts of others. That only their way of believing is correct. Only their God is the true God. That their way of showing faith is the right way. That's not saying that organised religions are bad. They are not. Its those who attempt to control the thoughts and beliefs of the one who choose to worship. Give me a church of Faith and Love of God. That will be a church that I could worship at. Worship my God that is. Not some fixed idea of what God is. Because my idea of God and your idea of God might be two differant thing. Both correct. To say that your beliefs are truer to God than mine just doesn't jive with reality of the God Essence. Arguments about good and evil have crossed these pages a number of time. Many here believe for instance that Hitler is existing is some sort of purgatory because of the Holocaust. Yet the same people extend love the GW Bush and ignore his atrocities and ethnic cleansing. Its funny how beliefs get in the way of truth and of God. Especially those ones done in the name of God. The differances for someone like me is that I send out healing love to Hitlers energy as well as to Bush's. Not hate and anger. I want Hitler to be in a heaven for healing, if that's what is required. Not rotting in some hell. Just like how Bush will most likly need to spend a little time. It could be a crowed place filled with a few religious leaders as well. That's if Hitler, and a number of others with the same sort of records, haven't already moved on to heaven or ever further. That's not even mentioning what is going on in Gaza. Whats with the Jews killing all those civilians and then its off to pray. Makes me shake my head in confusion and reaffirms my  personal beliefs in organised religions in the name of specific Gods. Well, as you can see I have a long way to go before I am ready for the aperture. Just one more thing..I love and forgive all of them, as I know my God does also.
Joe  

I can't say absolutely for certain what's right when it comes to eating animals. In the end I do what feels right. I've been doing so for over 20 years. I wonder if souls that get involved with animal incarnations are developed enough to make a choice. Would a developed soul choose to incarnate as an animal?

Do you remember Robert Monroe's story about BB? He wanted to take on a human incarnation. Spirits tried to talk him (him?) out of it because incarnating as a human can be really tough. BB ended up taking on an incarnation where he was a woman who had a miserable life and was a servant to an unloving husband. BB really regretted taking on the incarnation. Perhaps the human race shouldn't provide so many bad choices.

I suppose something could be done to cause unpreferable pregnancies to not work, but that would be a drastic choice. Perhaps it would be better to improve the status quo.

 Joe, you wrote the below re: Recoverer


hawkeye wrote on Jan 29^th, 2009 at 1:31pm:

Your statement to me show hate...

 This is primarily what i was responding to, because to me it is very extreme, and a major mischaracterization.  "Hate" is a very strong word, and one which I haven't ever sensed in relation to Albert/Recoverer.  Stubborn tendencies, opinionated, occasionally too persistent with certain expressions, etc. yes, but not anything even close to hate.  

 You also mischaracterized him and his beliefs in other ways.  

 Re: the animal issue, i was trying to make a deeper point.  Like Albert said, and i agree with, the reason its important to not contribute to the torture and killing of animals, is because LIKE HUMANS they have both a developed nervous system AND a developed emotional system, i.e. they feel fear in a way similar to us.  

 Plants react to harm in a way, but they do not have a developed nervous system wherein they feel physcial pain like us and they do not have a developed emotional system like us wherein they feel acute emotional fear similar to humans.  

 These are big differences between animals/humans, and plants though All is One, and One is All.  Why you persist in this arguement i do not fully understand.  

  Maybe at some point in the farther future, humans will become so evolved as to not have to use or harm any life at all in order to stay in-physical, but for most that day is far off.  

I strongly believe that if that is the case, then you are doing the right thing. You know whats right for you.
I wonder what BB's final lesson from living an earthly human existence ended up being or if it has been assimilated by him yet? Our opportunities are vast as far as learning experiences go. The choices we make can be all the difference.
When I wrote about living lives as plants or animals, I phased. I remembered living as a blade of grass. Tall and blowing in the wind along side of tens of thousands of other blades of grass. We were a collective consciousness. It felt good. I would live again as that blade of grass or as an animal if there was a lession needed by me to learn through living that experience.
I hate the way animals are raised for food. It truly is a horrible existence as far as my understanding would be. I was raised on the farm and have killed both animals for food and for what I though at the time was pleasure. I cut down crops for food also. Its a good thing that only potatoes have eyes because if all the plants had the ability to express fear and pain like the animals do, we all would have starved by now. We really are not such a loving species. Small farms always did a better job at being humane. Aka conversed with me at one time about how pigs feel fear when they are brought to slaughter. They know they are going to die. I don't doubt him. I think most animals raised the way they are, now feel the same fear.
Now abortion is such a personal matter. I don't agree that it should be use as a method of birth control but in the same breath I believe it is about choice. If a woman is raped and gets pregnant, should she be forced to have that child? Does the being make the decision to exist in fetus form only, just be be killed during an abortion? Are there lession both given and received from such things?  Do we develop brain stem cells by creating life, only to terminate the life to extract them? Then use the cells to save a life. Then there are those who would never bring their child to a doctors. Prayer will fix it all and there is no need for Drs., God will decide the fate of the child. Just pray, that will work good enough. Are they right or wrong? When the child dies was its Gods choice or will, or the parents? Are any of those sort of decisions right or wrong? Its choices. What I believe to be right is not so with others. For some, that eating of a burger is no better than aborting that fetus. I believe that its these choices allow us the opportunity to grow and learn. To become closer to our God, no matter how God is represented. But without these opportunities of choice, would the human experience offer us any means of getting back to source?
Joe  

AKA, perhaps you should look farther than just the body. I know you understand that there is more than the phyical. Why you must close your mind to the obvious I will never understand. Think OOB. What is your nervous system like when you are OOB or dead. You don't have one. This is the point that vegetarians just don't get. They are killing plants. They are no better than a person that kills an animal for food. Just differant. You, just like I, feel no need to apologise for taking the food. When you kill that plant, do you feel obligated to give thanks for it? I believe we should all be thankful for the sacrifice of life that all animals and all plants give for our existence. We are no better or farther progressed than they. Perhaps they are really far ahead of us as far as progression goes. They have been around a lot longer in the phyical.

(If I offended you Albert by saying that your statement showed hate, I apologise. I know you are a loving soul.)  

If child asks a man for help, should the man reply: "Help you? What about all of the other people in the World that need help?

I believe it is a mistake to mix a bunch of issues together to an extent where you can't decide about any of them. It is better to discern them on an issue by issue basis.

Regarding praying, why should God do anything if we don't do anything?

Regarding abortion, as I wrote before, I don't know the answer. That being the case, I wouldn't take a chance and choose abortion.  A soul of a child has nothing to do with a mother being raped. If a mother doesn't want to raise a child perhaps she can put the child up for adoption. A lot of people have abortions without rape being a part of it.

 

Hawkeye:

Is pulling weeds or mowing one's lawn, the same as killing one's pet? Should a man who has pit bulls fight be able to use a: "You mow your lawn defense?

How about when we scratch ourselves and kill skin cells? Is that the same as killing a person?

The reason people and animals are able to feel pain, is because they have nervous systems that allow them to do so.

The reasons people and animals are able to experience fear, is because their bodies release chemicals that cause them to experience fear.

Fear is related to the fight or flight response. Plants don't have this response because they can't run or fight. If a burgler breaks into your house, you can be certain that your dog will respond rather than your house plant.

I believe it is rather obvious that plant bodies were designed to provide a different kind of life experience than animal bodies.

Sometimes our common sense does know better, than a detailed philosophical answer.

How is a person "ever" going to figure out the right thing to do, if he or she comes up with rationalizations, justifications and denials for everything.




hawkeye wrote on Jan 29^th, 2009 at 8:49pm:

AKA, perhaps you should look farther than just the body. I know you understand that there is more than the phyical. Why you must close your mind to the obvious I will never understand. Think OOB. What is your nervous system like when you are OOB or dead. You don't have one. This is the point that vegetarians just don't get. They are killing plants. They are no better than a person that kills an animal for food. Just differant. You, just like I, feel no need to apologise for taking the food. When you kill that plant, do you feel obligated to give thanks for it? I believe we should all be thankful for the sacrifice of life that all animals and all plants give for our existence. We are no better or farther progressed than they. Perhaps they are really far ahead of us as far as progression goes. They have been around a lot longer in the phyical. (If I offended you Albert by saying that your statement showed hate, I apologise. I know you are a loving soul.)

You make excellent points. I know that we are all right. None wrong. Just with different answers and lessons. I think that you Recoverer are thinking along the same lines as aka. Thats great. If you have traveled to the astral then you will have probably experienced plant life there. Now those plants, just like us when we are there are not "in body". Does that make them less than you or an animal? And if they are less than why would they exist there?I would find it most interesting to more fully understand how both you and aka believe the spiritual awareness levels to be. What algae at the bottom then up to multy celled plants, to what then, small weeds or grass, then where? Fish, then? To me that all goes back to living in the physical and being stuck in that life and living process. God gave man power over the beasts in the field. and fish in the sea and the birds in the sky's. Its yet again "power over" or "being better or more than" something else. Its bull. Understanding that you are no more or less than anyone else or anything else might just open up a doorway to the All Powerful Creator. But this argument could go on for some time and many will never see eye to eye on everything. I think you are welcome to have your personal beliefs. As well as aka is. I don't have to agree with them. And that's OK also. If I offended you Albert, as aks thinks I may possible have, I am sorry. I meant no harm to you. I have spoken with my "All" and fully understand just how equal we are to plants and animals. Your God or Creator might place you above all others. Mine doesn't. It places me beside and equal to all other. I have no desire to better than any of them. Where I am headed, we are all the same. A fragment of one. Equal to All.
Joe  

 Hi Joe, i found your comments about me being too focused on the physical quite funny, and from many perspectives!  Especially in regards to me practicing vegetarianism out of ethical reasons.  :-X 8-)

  Like Albert i was curious about your referencing to me as aka and AKA, and not by my name Justin, and truth be told i wasn't quite convinced by your explanation BUT that's another story, and as my generation or really the one after says "whatev".    

  I wish you the highest spiritual good, whatever your true feelings and thoughts towards me, or towards Yeshua, or Albert for that matter.

 It's kind of silly to argue about Yeshua, and its not something I think he appreciates, so i will stop here.  

 

Volu wrote on Jan 29^th, 2009 at 4:35pm:

Justin, "So Volu, there is something lacking or limiting in the notion of self sacrifice for the greater good of the All? And to return positivity to those who hand you negativity?" Yes, I think so; turning the other cheek - allowing the abuse to continue. No victim, no victimizer. Clearly a difference of opinion, but there you go. :)

 To me, this does not mean that one necessarily allows themselves to become a doormat.  There are times to say "no", there are times to walk away, there are times to defend or speak up about principles, but ever its the intent, the motivation, etc behind an action which makes it growth producing or limiting for a person.  Do you defend/resist more for your own negative tendencies and feelings (like revenge), or for higher principles and the good of the All.  Things like this are important to consider, and each situation can be different in the call of what kind of reaction is best for both oneself and the collective.

 I find true strength in the example of Yeshua.  His life and example was a statement of a couple of things, that you cannot really harm the real parts of a person, especially when they have transcended the physical.  

 He showed that there is no such thing as a "victim" for a fully Source attuned consciousness.   He had the ability to easily wither those who "attacked", lied about, tried to manipulate, tortured, and viciously murdered him and for what, because he spoke the truth (sometimes critically) and loved others.

 Instead of withering, he looked past these ill intentioned and spiteful actions and feelings towards his little self, loved them just as much as he loved those who agreed with and treated him well, and he said even while being strung up "forgive them Father for they know not what they do."  He realized that spiritually, they were as children and didn't yet know better.  

 If he had attacked in return, if he had withered the hands that struck him, he would not have been a Christ in the flesh.  

 We see a somewhat similar, though less extreme and dramatic example, in the Tibetan Monks and how they are dealing with the Chinese gov. and their mistreating of the Tibetans.  Is this weakness, is compassion/love weak, or is it really the strongest stuff around?   What would you advocate, them buying up arms and attacking the Chinese in return?  
Perhaps you would, but are you as spiritually attuned as a human can become?   Say theoretically Jesus really did live as a historical person, and the N.T. while skewed somewhat, is overall true, would you say that you are more aware and consciousness expanded than he was?

 

 

No Justin, aka really meant aka. (Not the "aho" that I had used in the past during another conversation between us.) For me it really is just being lazy. I commend you for taking a stand with your vegetarianism along with Albert. You should always do what you feel is right. Just because I believe all things equal, and it would seem that both Albert and yourself believe differently is no problem. We would make pretty boring conversation if we all thought along the same lines. As my beliefs allow for even the worst of our humanity into heaven when they are forgiven by themselves and/or by the Creator, some here can't have it within their realities. As I don't know I don't really know why you practice vegetarianism. I am sure they are very valid. I have no problems with or ill feelings towards you, Albert, or Yeshua. I don't understand where would come from. What the real justification for the thought, only you would know. Some time back I had mentioned I didn't like men with red hair. You took quite an offence to the statement. You thought I was Joe Eagle or someone like that I recall, also. Both of us have something or some reason for the rub. Perhaps a past life thing.
I just recalled a story. There was this girl I know who is into David Ike. Big time. Pushing the whole reptilian agenda thing and all. She knew I was off to TMI for a week and upon my return really wanted me to listen to David tapes and seminar. When I explained to her my thinking, she just couldn't get it, and then she told me how desperately she wanted to put her brain into my head. I got quite the giggle out of it. Thought "No thanks, I am happy with my brain".
I wish the All of you the highest of spiritual wellness right back aka. If I have offended you, I know your beliefs couldn't allow you to hold it against me. That wouldn't be very Yeshua like.
Joe
 

Something tells me that heads of lettuce don't have it as bad as pigs who spend their entire life in cages that are so small that they can't even turn around. Imagine what people would think if somebody did the same thing to their pet dog or a horse. Sometimes it is okay to look at things according to the hear-now.

If you can feed a starving child right now should you do so, or should you give the kid a lecture in metaphysics?

 Hi Joe,

 Thanks for the further explanation, and yes your past derogatory references to me is part of why i thought perhaps there was another reason for you call me aka.  Thought maybe it was a snide little personal joke designed to poke another for a reaction.  I will say that on at least a few occasions, i did not get a very sincere vibe from you.

  Re: vegetarianism, i do not personally care if you become a vegetarian, nor am i trying to convert you.   I never wanted this to become a discussion about vegetarianism to begin with.

 You wrote earlier re: Recoverer,
Quote:

"It seams that your heart is closed to the possibility of others being equal to... or even perhaps bigger than he."

 I was trying to make a roundabout point that if Albert didn't think all Beings were essentially equal, One, and if he didn't respect other beings besides Yeshua, then I doubt he would be a vegetarian.  He is a vegetarian out of respect, consideration, and concern for animals and the intense physical pain and emotional fear they often go through to become a persons meal.  

 I asked you what about you, do you walk the walk more purely, or more talk the talk.  

 As i explained to you before, you are right, all energy, all consciousnesses are connected and essentially One and equal in that sense.  

 Yet, there are obvious differences in physical, and otherwise, between say plants, animals, and humans.  Within that comparison, both many animals (particularly foul and especially any mammals), are like humans in that they can experience intense pain and emotional fear.  

 Plants do not, they are just no designed that way.  It is simple compassion, simple decency, simple respect for the concern for other beings different, yet connected to and similar to humans, to NOT contribute to the torture and killing of animals unless one absolutely NEEDS TO IN ORDER TO SURVIVE.   Most people i know in this day and age, do not need to contribute to the torture and killing of animals to survive.  

  What I and Albert are talking about, is simple common sense relating to having compassion for another beings acute suffering both physically and emotionally.  Plants just aren't built that way, their consciousness and bodies are different, though they are connected and One with All, just as All life is.  

 These reasons in relation to animals, are the same reasons I wouldn't torture or kill a human for food.   Would you?  I wouldn't think so.   Why, if animals, plants, and humans are exactly alike?    

 With that said, if one feels they must eat meat, then ideally, ethically, they would benefit from getting meat from animals raised and slaughtered in the most humane ways possible.  Or animals hunted with little awareness of same, and quickly killed.  

 I've gotten guidance that in the days to come, i may need to occasionally hunt and eat flesh in order to survive, and if it becomes that much of a necessity than i suppose i would have to do it occasionally.   But, i would never ever again contribute to the corrupt, totally inhumane, torturous mainstream meat and dairy world.  

  Those who do and don't think twice about it, well it indicates something about them and their "Heart openness" or rather lack thereof.  It indicates that they care more for shallow, hedonistic material pleasures than another being who feels acute physical pain and emotional fear like themsevles.  

 To not contribute at all to this monster machine of conventionally raised "food", takes at first some discipline and self sacrifice.  It is far easier to stay in ones negative and nonconstructive ways.  It is easy to make excuses, to rationalize, in order to not commence with self change.  It is easy to put the little self above others.   Hence collective human tendencies, and why the world and many people in same is so imbalanced and lacking in real love.  

 Perhaps this is why I have sensed and met many more older Souls, a much higher percentage who are vegetarian or vegan in lifestyle, than i have in the carnivore world.  And often, in the carnivore world, many of the older Souls i've met, tended to eat very little meat compared to the average Westerner and especially American.

 Another benefit of going meatless beyond the compassion to animals issue, is that you are not contributing to the pollution of the Planet and thus to the ill health of ALL WITHIN IT.   Giant "livestock" agribusiness is responsible for a lot of pollution that goes on.

 With all the above said, it would be hard for most people who are say living in the climate and ways of the traditional Eskimos to go completely meatless, for meat is one of the only foods around, and also more heat producing than most veggie foods.   Yet, theoretically it could be doable.  
I recently watched a weather channel show about a man who lives in the far north of Alaska, wherein it regularly drops to 50 below not even considering the wind chill.   He, even in the long, dark winter, only wears a t-shirt, some pants, and gloves for his hands.  An example of "mind over matter".   Such will power and belief, could also alter the seeming physical need for "meat" in ones diet as well.  

 I'm not black and white about this, or any subject.  I see the relativity in all situations.  

 As ever, actions speak much louder than typed words.  There is nothing else i could say or outline about this particularly topic, so i am done.   Be a conventional meat eater, a more ethical meat eater, be a vegetarian, be a vegan, i could personally not care that much about it one way or another, but your arguments lack plain common sense and logic, but speak much more of the need or wanting to believe something out of attachment NOT "Love" and "heart openness" which you so threw in Alberts face earlier.  

Robert, if you limit your Church to the Christian faith "only", you will not be able to help "many".  If you look toward Jesus as an advanced human being (and this planet has had many) and approach your helping others to understand what the afterlife is-- that Jesus' spirit was more evolved, then you will perk the interest of more who are searching. Don't limit your church to a religion. The Unitarian Universalist Church accepts all beliefs. We had a minister who was an athiest! You need to separate philosophy from spirituallity. Spirit has no religion. It is one with All.  Jesus was only a very small part of Spiritual growth. The Buddist and Hindus have been expanding their spiritallity for many centuries, before Christ came into "being".
Who was he? A man born of a human woman. He was a student for many years in hiatus, examplary as a Jewish Rabbi and then a teacher of spiritaullity, not religion. Edgar Cayce said that he met with Jesus and Jesus was very wealthy while here on earth. He could afford to travel and study and teach.
Please don't limit your helping others find their "other side" with the restrictions of a religion.  Love and Light-- Carol Ann

I never try to talk my friends and relatives into becoming vegetarians.  However, if the subject comes up.

There have been a couple of times when I tried to share the story behind veal to people, but they "really" didn't want to hear what I had to say. They chose to remain ignorant about the matter.

Nicely stated Carol Ann--Brava.

Robert, Would I be welcome into this church you speak of? You can see my tolerance level. I wish you good luck and God speed. You would serve your community well.
Joe

Recoverer,
"Moral relatavism suggests that a person can't listen to his or her conscious, common sense and heart, and see what actually is right. I believe that false channeled sources are greatly responsible for moral relatavism. They get people to believe that just about anything is okay."

I go with learning to trust what's within. Discernment. Haven't met anybody who hasn't made mistakes, even with the best of intentions, but that's a part of learning. As for channeled sources, family, friends, the government, ieasu, strangers, dark polarity, light polarity; the external - discerntment, again. If you think jesus is the best thing since breathing, then that's what's right for you. I don't like religion, that's what's right for me.

"Some people want to associate love with freedom. This is okay, but I believe that true freedom goes along with responsible behavior."

Yes, and I choose to define what's responsible behaviour, and not let any religions nor their deities decide for me.

Justin,
"To me, this does not mean that one necessarily allows themselves to become a doormat.  There are times to say "no", there are times to walk away, there are times to defend or speak up about principles, but ever its the intent, the motivation, etc behind an action which makes it growth producing or limiting for a person."

Your thoughts sound healthy.

The bible quote says bend over backwards to me, the sort of thing an oppressor would love. Played a computer game yesterday called Fable 2. A dark character in the game hit me three times, and he wanted me to say 'thank you' after each hit. He stated it was because he wanted to teach me to be obedient, and not to question his will.

"Do you defend/resist more for your own negative tendencies and feelings (like revenge), or for higher principles and the good of the All.  Things like this are important to consider, and each situation can be different in the call of what kind of reaction is best for both oneself and the collective."

What's the good of the All?

"He showed that there is no such thing as a "victim" for a fully Source attuned consciousness. He had the ability to easily wither those who "attacked", lied about, tried to manipulate, tortured, and viciously murdered him and for what, because he spoke the truth (sometimes critically) and loved others."

Story-lines designed for the listener/reader to sympathize with the blood drenched character of the story. Manipulation of the feelings. Another story includes planes and towers.

"Instead of withering, he looked past these ill intentioned and spiteful actions and feelings towards his little self, loved them just as much as he loved those who agreed with and treated him well, and he said even while being strung up "forgive them Father for they know not what they do."  He realized that spiritually, they were as children and didn't yet know better."

As I child I once said that god wasn't home when I didn't see the funeral car outside the church. I didn't know any better. 'Let all the children come to me, do not stop them'.

"We see a somewhat similar, though less extreme and dramatic example, in the Tibetan Monks and how they are dealing with the Chinese gov. and their mistreating of the Tibetans. Is this weakness, is compassion/love weak, or is it really the strongest stuff around?"

I was in Dharamsala about 10 years ago and listened to a Tibetan monk tell about his exp. It was more extreme than any religious story I've heard.

"What would you advocate, them buying up arms and attacking the Chinese in return?"

That's your projection. I don't know what they should do, all the individuals have to find that out for themselves.
 
"Perhaps you would, but are you as spiritually attuned as a human can become?"

I'm not a human, but having a human experience. That's good attunement in my book, and yet I've got far to go. Right back at you; are you as spiritually attuned as you can become?

"Say theoretically Jesus really did live as a historical person, and the N.T. while skewed somewhat, is overall true, would you say that you are more aware and consciousness expanded than he was?"

Am I, as an incarnation, one piece of the whole self, more advanced than an astral construct? Yes.

Volu, I like that mind set and I am prone to agree...though I think Jesus rebelled against the very things that make me sick about religion. I'm just sorry that his truest of meanings are lost on so many Christians thanks to the dogma instilled in them by people who weren't even there. Just an opinion and I've heard the argument that Paul was around the disciples but why is it that nothing survives from the actual period Jesus walked? Why isn't that stuff in the bible? Because it didn't fit the mold of the church..again my opinion.

I sure hope that when aliens make themselves known to everyone on earth, none of them resemble vegetable matter as it would seam that some would only welcome them as soup or in a salad, and not as equal living things deserving of the love experience. I thank my God that my sense is not common, and I may be finally above some of physical realities, earthy logic. Thank you for your most generous acknowledgment. As for attachment and love, I do have that need. Part of me acknowledges that even the smallest of living things need love energy and PUL. I see all living thing as equals not one above the other. I am thankful for all of their sacrifices. Not just the "beings". Mother Earth needs love and healing also.

Volu wrote on Jan 31^st, 2009 at 11:19am:

I go with learning to trust what's within. Discernment. Haven't met anybody who hasn't made mistakes, even with the best of intentions, but that's a part of learning. As for channeled sources, family, friends, the government, ieasu, strangers, dark polarity, light polarity; the external - discerntment, again. If you think jesus is the best thing since breathing, then that's what's right for you. *I don't like religion, that's what's right for me.

*my use of italics and bold

  Can't blame you one that one.  I don't much like religion either.  Neither does Recoverer, or many others who deeply respect Yeshua and believe he lived as a human.  One can really like and deeply respect Yeshua without having one iota of liking for religion or Christianity in its religious and dogmatic form.  

 Notice Bruce Moen, he writes about Yeshua a bit here and there in his books, and the way he writes about him, seems to obviously indicate that Bruce has quite a lot of respect for the guy.  

  He even capitalizes "He" in reference to him a bunch of times.  Is Bruce religious?   Is he the type to get stuck in a religious, Christian based hollow heaven?

  Bruce is one of the most intune people that i've yet come across and tuned into and gotten guidance about.   My dreams have verified for me that his claim and he and Bob Monroe are in the same immediate "Disk" self are true (i saw their faces morphing together and switching back and forth), yet he is vibrationally beyond what Bob reached in his life.  

  Speaking of Bob, who then is the mysterious "He/She" of Bob's last book?  

 Bob relates in his 3rd book asking his I/There/Disk/Greater self if he could meet the most mature person living in his pace/time cycle as a human.   He was told it might not be what you'd expect.  

 In comes "He/She" the some 1800 year old human who doesn't need to eat, nor sleep, doesn't age, works many various physical jobs (because "he likes people"), and which Bob hints is known about in some way already.   It's clear from the account that his I/There was quite right about him not expecting it, and Bob seemed pretty surprised.

  The only historical person that I know who was said to have transcended physical death around that long ago, is Yeshua.   Another clue is that Bob says he is not Asiatic in origin, i.e. he says "occidental" in origin.   Now some people might think first that it could be some ancient Indian Yogi or Tibetan Monk, yet Bob's info says no.  

  Besides that previous list (from a previous post) of non religious psychic sources who said that Yeshua was both a physically born personality and a graduate of the highest order, there are the well known and respected intuitive/nonphysical explorers Rudolph Steiner and Emmanuel Swedonburg.   Both of whom who tended much more towards science and research than religion before they become Seers/intuitives.

 And while the historical evidence seems flimsy to some, there is some nonetheless.   Then there are reasons that Josephus for example, didn't write directly of Yeshua--He was a Jew! and didn't like Yeshua or Christianity--he wasn't writing for the Christians but for the Jews.  Thus like many historians past and present, he was biased as are all non graduates to varying degrees in various areas.  

 Then we have the one and only, hotly debated in science circles, and controversial Shroud of Turin, which i've done a lot of study on the research about.  Many researchers with science backgrounds, have concluded that whatever it is, it is not a hoax and not made my human hands.  So much of it points to a uncanny similarity to Yeshua and circumstances surrounding his torture and crucifixion.

  So, we have Rosiland McKnight (and her guidance) long time and very influential in formation of TMI's 1st program--who vouches for Yeshua and his enlightened life, we have Edgar Cayce and his work perhaps one of the most profound psychic works out there, we have various clues and hints by the extremely non religious Monroe, we have Bruce Moen, we have some historical evidence and documentation, we have the Shroud of Turin lending strong suggestions, and we have the personal experiences of people like Albert and I (neither whom are religious) who have gotten numerous guidance messages about the authenticity of Christ and his role both in and out of the Earth.

 It's important to note, most of these sources are non religious and had a very universal perspective on spirituality in general, and believed that we ALL can attain the degree of graduation (for there are different grades of graduation) in the Earth as Christ did.  Hence, they don't have a religious agenda to push of limiting humanity but exalting Christ for various control purposes.  

 But who do we have speaking against Christ and saying he was just an astral thoughtform?   The likes of David Icke and Val, whom both i've read some of and got the definite vibe and feeling that there a lot of deliberate dis-info in their work (there is plenty of truth too, but more half truths which is the best way to deceive people).   The latter source is from what i can gather, once and perhaps still very connected to the U.S. gov.  

  Then we have other interesting tidbits scattered here and there, like this.  Both Bob Monroe and Joe McMoneagle write about a little remote viewing session that Bob had Joe do one time.   While i don't vibe with McMoneagle on a deeper level, i do respect his remote viewing skills.  

 Anyways, Joe didn't know about the target before hand (it was "Jesus"), and interestingly one of his impressions about the target was kind of transcendent human/nonhuman whom he even connected to having reddish hair color.  

  Many years ago, Edgar Cayce spontaneously gave some info about what Christ looked like in his life as a human.   He said his hair was rather reddish in tint.  (as a side note, he gave his weight as an extremely similar one to what scientific research on the Turin Shroud has ascertained Shroud dude to have weighed about)

  Even more interestingly, i read a NDE wherein a Jewish woman reported meeting Christ and also said likewise that she saw him in very vivid, physical and detailed like appearance that that strangely, he had reddish hair.  

 Now, i've seen quite a lot of the artistic renditions of Christ that were religiously inspired, and yeah reddish hair is just not that common at all.    Most often he has brown hair of some darker shade, and occasionally more blondish--the common stereotypical "Aryan" Jesus.  (Cayce's source said he looked neither all that Jewish or Aryan in features).    

 One would think that if Christ was nothing but an astral thoughtform created by the collective beliefs of religious folks, he and his fictitious  appearance in various non religious and psychically gathered experiences would conform to the more commonly accepted and promoted views, particularly in relation to religious art since its the only medium which really seeks to put a look to the character.  Really, who besides some Celtic looking, reddish hair folk would think Christ had reddish tinted hair (btw, more specifically Cayce said it was kind of a mix of light brown, with strong reddish and some golden highlights)?   For one, hair color that is naturally and strongly reddish tinted, whether very red, a light brown reddish and golden mix, auburn, etc. are the rarest natural hair colors and tints around.

  Despite my many years of interest and involvement in nonphysical subjects, experiences, and reality, well my left brain hasn't fallen completely out of my head yet, thank goodness, otherwise i probably might just believe what i want to believe based on nothing more than inner prejudices, dislike, distasteful experiences with religion or religious folks, and religiously inspired angst.  One could even have "experiences" and get nonphysical info based on that.   We oft perceive as we believe, unless we attune to the great perception expanding energy/consciousness of PUL--as Bruce often talks about in his work.

 He seems to believe and promote that choosing and attuning to PUL is the only way to transcend self, with all its skewed perceptions and beliefs.  

 But i cannot convince you of anything--no matter how many credible, more verified, non religious, psychic sources i outline or how similar they are on core info relating to Yeshua (that we was born, taught, and reached the ultimate graduation in the flesh) or how much logic i use, can I?  I'm not writing just to or for you though.  

 

hawkeye wrote on Jan 31^st, 2009 at 4:22pm:

I sure hope that when aliens make themselves known to everyone on earth, none of them resemble vegetable matter as it would seam that some would only welcome them as soup or in a salad, and not as equal living things deserving of the love experience. I thank my God that my sense is not common, and I may be finally above some of physical realities, earthy logic. Thank you for your most generous acknowledgment. As for attachment and love, I do have that need. Part of me acknowledges that even the smallest of living things need love energy and PUL. I see all living thing as equals not one above the other. I am thankful for all of their sacrifices. Not just the "beings". Mother Earth needs love and healing also.

   Joe i got this really funny visual while reading your reply, i saw this "green man" type E.T., me really hungry and him seeming just oh so delectable, me taking a couple delicious bites out of "him" and him not really caring cause well for one, he didn't have a nervous system and pain receptors, nor did he have any emotions like humans and animals have so he didn't have any fear of self destruction.  He kind of just stood there like your average houseplant and took it the poor fellow.
Man, i really hope that i'm not tempted thusly in the future.  I don't know how i could live with myself if i fall prey to such darker instincts.  
Thanks for the laugh!  Truly humor is about as Christ like, besides love, one can get.  ;) ;D


 On a more serious note, there are some who believe that one can live without eating anything.  Some label this as Breatharianism.  If its possible at all, well it seems rather rare for a human to completely do, though speak of the Light filled Devil, Yeshua was said to have gone very long times without food, to the point where his friends the disciples went up to him and tried to get him to eat something, which he refused as a teaching opportunity and told them, "I have food ye know not of".    

 Then we have the super graduate "He/She" of Monroe's 3rd book whom Bob picked up telepathically that this person didn't eat food anymore, this person said, "Oh, i gave those up (eating and sleeping) years ago."

 That food that Yeshua talks about, to me, is PUL and the pure attuning to, choosing, and living same.  If lived purely enough, it allows or facilitates one to transcend all human and physical limitations.  Truly we are unlimited beings, though most of us have many and constant thought prisons around ourselves.

   So, yeah to address your constant points to me about plants, etc, well I'm consciously working towards what some label as being a "Breatharian", though i must say its more of a side affect rather than a goal unto itself, and meanwhile i'm not particularly bothered by eating plants since they do not have a nervous system and don't have an emotional system like most animals and all humans do.  I wouldn't eat my pets, and I wouldn't eat my human friends, so why would i eat a cow?

 Probably will take quite awhile--the whole breatharian thing, if ever reached, in this life.   Good thing i'm still relatively young though, plenty of time to practice that which will get me there.  

  Someone once said to me that walking on water, not needing to eat food, etc. (all things that Yeshua did in his life) were just mere parlor tricks and didn't indicate anything about spiritual attunement.   Well hot darn, i haven't met anyone in physical so far who could do any of the above.  Of course, i haven't met anybody in physical whom i sensed the degree and purity of radiation of PUL, as i have with Yeshua in my dreams and nonphysical experiences.

 There are some so called spiritual teachers, mostly gurus, who have faked various miraculous like things, or used massive collective group energy (most anyone could materialize a coin or what not if they had hundreds or thousands of adoring and believing disciples around them helping them out via their collective belief) to achieve some minor results, but yeah no such complete mastery over so called physical reality.    

Beau,
"Volu, I like that mind set and I am prone to agree...though I think Jesus rebelled against the very things that make me sick  about religion. I'm just sorry that his truest of meanings are lost on so many Christians thanks to the dogma instilled in them by people who weren't even there. Just an opinion and I've heard the argument that Paul was around the disciples but why is it that nothing survives from the actual period Jesus walked? Why isn't that stuff in the bible? Because it didn't fit the mold of the church..again my opinion."

Just an opinion you say, but an opinion I think is important, as you are the captain. jesus doesn't apply to my world, but I like that your sentiments seem to come from your spirit, and not what some would like for you to think.

Justin,
"[...]But i cannot convince you of anything--no matter how many credible, more verified, non religious, psychic sources i outline or how similar they are on core info relating to Yeshua (that we was born, taught, and reached the ultimate graduation in the flesh) or how much logic i use, can I?"

That's a good estimation. :) My greater self has 24/7 input pouring in from over a thousand incarnations, choosing what I want to expericence, learning what I need to do to eventually move on. So I don't need nor want a master. Any being who presents themselves as a master/teacher, who needs a following, and/or hands me you shoulds, you must, dos and don'ts: so long, and thanks for all the laughter, and maybe we'll hook up again when you're content living your own life, and not too busy trying to run mine nor others'. There seems to be a vast melding somewhere along a long, long road. Not there yet, by a long shot, and happy with it, as there seems to be plenty more to enjoy, by exploring Individuality (like a mini-source expanding, and then coming back together), before that. *Cue: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EegRh8Z4H-o The 5th Dimension, Aquarius/Let The Sunshine In at 2:16*

"I'm not writing just to or for you though."

What?! ;) No, I get that; a sharing of thoughts, and I like to hear what makes people tick, so thanks. :)

Volu, One of my most favourite songs. It is one I want to be played at my gathering.
This need for a "master", other than ourselves, to me shows a lack of love for ones self. Some feel a need for a Deity like Jesus to forgive them. And without this forgiveness they believe themselves not worthy of moving on to be enlightened. Many to be trapped within areas of F25 and 26.
Joe

Volu wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2009 at 4:47pm:

That's a good estimation. :) My greater self has 24/7 input pouring in from over a thousand incarnations, choosing what I want to expericence, learning what I need to do to eventually move on. So I don't need nor want a master. Any being who presents themselves as a master/teacher, who needs a following, and/or hands me you shoulds, you must, dos and don'ts: so long, and thanks for all the laughter, and maybe we'll hook up again when you're content living your own life, and not too busy trying to run mine nor others'. There seems to be a vast melding somewhere along a long, long road. Not there yet, by a long shot, and happy with it, as there seems to be plenty more to enjoy, by exploring Individuality (like a mini-source expanding, and then coming back together), before that. *Cue: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EegRh8Z4H-o The 5th Dimension, Aquarius/Let The Sunshine In at 2:16*

 Ah, the trust in only self attitude.  I've had that one before in many lives, and funny enough in those lives and in the times i felt that in this life, i just didn't progress as much as when i have humility and recognize that this little self with its narrowed awareness doesn't know better than those who have reached full graduation in the flesh, and hence it would be prudent to listen to those closely.  

 The little self is ever the stumbling block to a more full and complete spiritual growth.  

  When you, like Yeshua, reach that ultimate graduation in the flesh, then i will then humbly listen to you closely as well.   ;)

  So i see that your little self is infallible about the subject of Jesus and your beliefs regarding same, and by inference Bruce Moen, Bob Monroe, Rosiland McKnights guidance, Edgar Cayces gudiance, Emmanuel Swedonborg, Rudolph Steiner, historical documentation (for one, there is much more historical testimony/documentation for Jesus than say Krishna and many other far past teachers), my guidance, Joe McMoneagles remote viewing of target that Monroe handed him,  and various NDE's, are all probably just smoking way too much wacky tobacky or something and we are all completely off on this topic?

 Why would all these non religious sources (except the historical aspect i mentioned), promote and believe that Christ did live a life and reached a very high level of spiritual developement within the Earth?   What do the non religious have to gain from that?

 The wisdom of the little self--a thing to greatly exalt above all sources.

 I've met some people here and there who thought they were in communication with their greater/Disk self but when you looked under their slip a bit, really they were more in stronger and more consistent communication with forces which try to mislead despite their real Disks efforts to constantly steer them away from such interference (for every personality has freewill even from its Disk self).  'There are some well known and popular channelers who fall under that common experience.  

Why, well generally because of the energy/consciousness resonance law, and that they tended to place the little self above the collective and others in various ways, and still had much to learn about PUL and even more to put into practice.  So, like attracted like, all the while they thinking themselves above such dualistic fallacies as positive and unpositive, fast vibrating/expanded and slow vibrating, etc.    

 That is one of the common "tricks" of those forces which try to mislead, to convince people that there is no such thing as more constructive or less constructive.

 Quite common amongst these sources and people who listen to them non discriminatoryly, is a degrading in some way or manner of the life and example of Yeshua.  Funny how much attention an astral construct gets from so many of these, and for so long.

Justin, I hardily agree with much of what you've written in the last post here, but that said, what if Jesus had not been allowed to think creatively and form his own thoughts about what was the truth? Do you think he was born into the world with everything and didn't have to remember who he was? I don't think this ever gets addressed. Were are all creative thinkers at the root of what we are.

I say this again. The truth is spherical, like a globe--we could find out countries in her. Because while the truth is the earth's core we all stand in a different place on the planet, thus we see the truth from a different perspective. Nothing can change that as long as we are experiencing separation.

I'm not at all attacking you, Justin...I love how you make me think, sir.

Best to you, Volu

"Listen to me---Here what I say, Our hearts can be, nearer each day, only darling---Listen closely to me...I told the stars you're my won true love I want to love you tenderly. Those same bright stars in Heaven above know now how sweet, Sweet Hearts can be"---Buddy Holly, The Jesus of Rock n Roll---Just an opinion guys :D

Yours,
Beau
http://centrestage.org

 Hi Beau, no problem I get what you're saying and sense no personal attack, and even if i did it wouldn't bother me all that much.

 I agree with you to a point, and i would like to put things into perspective for you from my viewpoint.  

 Believe it or not, i rarely, rarely ever "preach" to others (except occasionally to my wife) in real life.  There are a few reasons for this; one is that i'm a fairly calm and gentle person and don't like getting overly heated which such preaching and real life debate can facilitate--cause if one loses their cool then it becomes harder for both parties to remain cool and cordial.  I've found that it is usually best to "teach" through example and just sharing vibes.  Through that mode, i have "converted" (i was not seeking to do same) some to vegetarianism though they did ask a few questions which i did answer.

 Often, i only speak in real life about these kinds of things or vegetarianism when someone asks me directly about it.

 2. i believe it is disrespectful to people in the sense that in such situations people oft feel overly cornered or singled out--you're putting them in a situation wherein they are more likely to lash out or at least feel some negativity towards you.  You are focusing a lot of them as an individual and if there is any kind of, or even just a hint of criticism, it can get uncomfortable for them.  

 This medium is much more detached in nature, and people can easily choose to read your words or not, and its easier for people to realize that some people like my self usually speak more in the general to people as a whole about these kinds of subjects i.e. more impersonally.

  Also notice that I did not start this thread.  I'm not on a zealous holy crusade to convince people of the greatness of Yeshua.  If i was, i would be more pro-active about it.   Usually i only speak long and hard about him when other sources severely degrade him or his example in some way.  

 I believe that if there are no outspoken voices to counter act that or give a balanced but different perspective of such expressions, then people who are more sitting on the fence about Yeshua (its those i am more speaking to than any) will be apt to believe these outside sources.  
In my experience, its somewhat rare for people to really go within under the ideal circumstances to get info.   Most just want to listen to outside sources--particularly in the book format-- a bit strange seeming to me sometimes that people pay money to read others opinions (of course the right book at the right time can be a great catalyst).  

 Consider a commonly held belief here--one about guidance and guides.    Guides are in the business of trying to change peoples limiting beliefs.   They do this in various ways, for various reasons, but one of the common reasons is that often the listener just doesn't listen very well nor make the effort to get into the right state to do so (many things can affect this state, even diet and health).  

  In the end, our self experience IS the best teacher, and yet we all have guides that are constantly trying to steer us in certain directions, and constantly trying to change/upgrade our belief systems.  

 The real guides rarely ever do this in a more forceful manner, and they don't use fear tatics like you are going to hell or something.  I'm occasionally a bit over blunt and persistent in my expressions, but i try hard and rarely lately get negatively personal with it, such as labeling people in a fixed manner, calling them derogatory names, etc.

 My guidance, i've found, is occasionally gently critical of me and my expressions and attitudes at times.  They do not "tear me down" about things ever, but i've gotten a stern, no nonsense and more Masculine response before.  

 Its much, much, much easier for a nonphysical guide to remain cool, calm, collected and in a more positive space at all times because well they aren't in the physical anymore.   This helps to release a lot of baggage and negativity.   Even those very mature, well when in physical it is harder to keep fully centered at all times like a nonphysical guide does.  In many respects, this is "battle ground Earth", and by its very nature has an uncentering and narrowing affect.  

  Also, a guide isn't usually too attached to whether or not they have changed a persons beliefs or perspective about something.  They do care of course, for they want the best for the person, but they are non ocd about it and they realize that sometimes people will just have to go through some stuff before they become more receptive to whatever concept, belief, attitude, or perspective.  

 Occasionally i am too attached to my beliefs, perceptions, feelings, and expressions.   This is because i'm not a full graduate in the flesh.  Oh, believe me, i could fake it if i cared what others thought of me, and live in a more false humility type manner, but that is a specific dharmic issue that i'm trying to counter act, hence my at times too outspokenness.   If you know astrology at all, well Pisces S. Node in the 7th and Libra Moon (strong karmic patterns) but Leo Rising, N. Node in Virgo in the 1st, and Capricorn Sun (dharmic patterns i.e. what we should become more of in the present) might indicate some of that to you.  

 Really i'm just following my life plan as was wrote up for me, but sometimes i go to the extremes and tip too far to the balance of the other side in my trying to achieve the perfect balance between these issues.

Gosh Justin, I feel a little bad, It wasn't my intent to direct anything toward you I was just bringing up a point that I think is often over looked about our own creativity in our advancement. Jesus had to rely on his, I'm sure of it. That was my only point. Thank you for this post, I feel I know you much more now. I really look forward to meeting you someday. ;)

 Also, i would like to more briefly add that when it comes to Yeshua i can become more overly passionate than in pretty much any other subject.  
Someone could rail at me and call me all kinds of names, and either i would just logically and cooly explain where they were misperceiving, or i would just ignore it.  

 I can become overly passionate re: Yeshua because i've become aware, non religiously and both from guidance and from synthesizing other guidance info, that his Disk is the Co-Creator of this at least Galaxy and of this World.  

 I also know and have become aware that He Co-Created my Disk and with the ultimate purpose and hope of me being a Retriever type.  He Co-Created many Disks within this Universe, but he loves all Disks dearly even the ones that stray far from Source and him.  

 I've become aware that he has helped my Disk and  in so many ways, so many times, and all with the purpose that i can grow to be fully happy and at peace again like he is.  In some ways, i've been more helped by him and his Disk, than by my own greater self/Disk.  I fully recognize that his Disk is vibrationally beyond my collective energies, even most of the most mature aspects.  Hence, there is no distortion, no skewing when it comes to his perception as there is occasionally in mine.

 So i feel so much gratitude, deep respect, and love to him that it sometimes bothers me when people degrade him in some manner.  To me, to say that he is nothing but an astral construct created by the collective religious beliefs is pretty derogatory.

In some ways, degrading Yeshua/his Disk-- its like a person cruelly hurting a happy, helpful, beautiful golden retriever puppy which is so pure and innocent.  It doesn't matter to me sometimes that both the dog and Yeshua always forgive these hurts, because it just so bothers me at times because it is so unbelievably wrong to do something like that to any aspect of Creation but especially intolerable when that aspect is as pure, loving, and helpful as they are.

 By extension, its like slapping and spitting in Source and all its selves in the face.   I believe that if more people really knew what he was about, they would at least speak up for him though they wouldn't necessarily debate others re: him like i have.  

Beau wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2009 at 12:48pm:

Gosh Justin, I feel a little bad, It wasn't my intent to direct anything toward you I was just bringing up a point that I think is often over looked about our own creativity in our advancement. Jesus had to rely on his, I'm sure of it. That was my only point. Thank you for this post, I feel I know you much more now. I really look forward to meeting you someday. ;)

 No need to feel bad, sometimes i just like to hear myself talk.  Isn't part of the reason we come on these boards to both listen to others, but also to self express  ;) :D

Justin,
"Ah, the trust in only self attitude."

Dark: I (the body) got it all right, and dont mind walking all over you. Light: I (the spirit) have got nothing right, can anybody save me?. Balance: I (the disc, bigger me, the being involved in this roleplaying game) know what's best, for me. I (mini-me; pun intended) don't know what proper balance is yet, but got lots of other smaller selves to work it out, with the director working behind the curtain. One of my fellow incarnations, close in the timeline, currently enjoys playing drums in a 70s progressive rock band, which bleeds into mine.

"I've had that one before in many lives, and funny enough in those lives and in the times i felt that in this life, i just didn't progress as much as when i have humility and recognize that this little self with its narrowed awareness doesn't know better than those who have reached full graduation in the flesh, and hence it would be prudent to listen to those closely."

Alleged masters claiming there's one path (conformity) for all doesn't hold water for me, as they haven't mastered allowance/releasing control yet. The destination's the same, but there are many ways of getting there.

"The little self is ever the stumbling block to a more full and complete spiritual growth."

The smaller self is still connected to the bigger self (the director) while acting in different scenes.

"When you, like Yeshua, reach that ultimate graduation in the flesh, then i will then humbly listen to you closely as well. ;)"

That's of course okay. You're happy with your world, good for you.

"So i see that your little self is infallible about the subject of Jesus and your beliefs regarding same, and by inference Bruce Moen, Bob Monroe, Rosiland McKnights guidance, Edgar Cayces gudiance, Emmanuel Swedonborg, Rudolph Steiner, historical documentation (for one, there is much more historical testimony/documentation for Jesus than say Krishna and many other far past teachers), my guidance, Joe McMoneagles remote viewing of target that Monroe handed him,  and various NDE's, are all probably just smoking way too much wacky tobacky or something and we are all completely off on this topic?"

Ah, the smaller selves of other I-Theres. As much as I like Bob, he's not my uncle nor master, very inspirational individual though. I go with what sounds right, and discard whatever doesn't. I don't have to eat all of the brownies offered. If others want to, your choice, your path. We're probably right and off at the same time, as we're still progressing. So, as of yet, we're not the crux (the most difficult sequence or section of a pitch) of it all, the highest rollers by the crap table, nor the trippiest space cadets to travel the hairline of a dancing teapot-nebulae not even there, but we do with what we've got so far, and continue to progress.

"Why would all these non religious sources (except the historical aspect i mentioned), promote and believe that Christ did live
a life and reached a very high level of spiritual developement within the Earth? What do the non religious have to gain from that?"

I dont't know, you'll have to ask them.

"The wisdom of the little self--a thing to greatly exalt above all sources."

Once my smaller self discovered my real identity, the fluoridan nightmare of exalting the external, bowing for the sand around the pidestal, the pidestal, the funky deity dressed in speedos on top of the pidestal, and crying I'm not worthy to be the scratch of thy wounds, became a pointless excercise. For me.

"I've met some people here and there who thought they were in communication with their greater/Disk self but when you looked under their slip a bit, really they were more in stronger and more consistent communication with forces which try to mislead despite their real Disks efforts to constantly steer them away from such interference (for every personality has freewill even from its Disk self).  'There are some well known and popular channelers who fall under that common experience."

I've met some people here and there and I thought different things of them, not sure if I got it all of it right though. Got leeway to make mistakes, but not go totally of my path, as my disc won't allow that to happen. It'a game, not a dungeon. I've had phases, where first the needle pointed more towards darker experiences than lighter, then vice versa, and now a more moderate situation, still with lots of fine tuning to do. My lighter exp. included pain and suffering, because I accepted the dark's gift of being a nobobdy (self sacrifice); their source of energy. I had lots of opposition to move out of unbalanced light mode, and the opposition was blatantly not friendly. Well, I gave them the finger, but not the whole hand.

"Why, well generally because of the energy/consciousness resonance law, and that they tended to place the little self above the collective and others in various ways, and still had much to learn about PUL and even more to put into practice.  So, like attracted like, all the while they thinking themselves above such dualistic fallacies as positive and unpositive, fast vibrating/expanded and slow vibrating, etc."

I'm happy about letting others progress at their tempo, some slower, some faster than my path. I now prefer to evolve as an individual, not the slow progression as a race, collective nor as a planet, and that's why I (the bigger one) chose Earth. As for unconditional love, I've seen many lips move, but didn't feel a thing except an obligation on their part. My best friend, whom love or other words can't even beigin to describe my feelings for, is also the one who previously hurt me (the smaller one) like nobody else. We worked it out. My best friend taught me to stand up for myself, among other things. That's were many/most experiences come from in this game, other smaller selves connected to bigger ones, but I feel no need to scrape for, nor worship this or other friends.

"That is one of the common "tricks" of those forces which try to mislead, to convince people that there is no such thing as more constructive or less constructive."

Backing off from my friend would have been more constructive, but that was not something I knew at that time, and so my friend stepped in, and we gave eachother valuable lessons.

"Quite common amongst these sources and people who listen to them non discriminatoryly, is a degrading in some way or manner of the life and example of Yeshua.  Funny how much attention an astral construct gets from so many of these, and for so long."

When Bob visited the curls, he recognized a pattern, a loop, because he had broken these loops (and moved on to another game with more advanced loops). Religion sure is loopy. For me. A big one.

We all know what "preaching" will get you when you continually direct it towards your wife or husband. Many times you end up drinking your morning coffee by yourself. No body wants to live a life of belittlement to feed over inflated egos. We can go through a number of lifetimes having to repeat the lessons we just haven't had the opportunity or fortitude to learn. Isn't that why we are here? To learn. With God within all of us, then looking within instead of towards others for direction and truth, might be a good place to start.  

 Volu, have you ever heard of the saying, "the burden of proof"?  I would like to change that a bit to the "burden of suggestive evidence".  

 As i pointed out, many more credible, more verified, psychic, and non religious sources agree on core, similar aspects of Yeshua.  I pointed out many of them earlier.  

 The "burden of suggestive evidence" is a simple concept and an in physical check and balance for nonphysical exploring and perception.  It would seem that the above burden weighs in balance of that Yeshua is not an astral construct.  

 You keep saying things like, "Religion sure is loopy. For me. A big one. "  

 I totally respect that, agree, and its not for me either.  But what does Yeshua and the reality of same, have to do with religion really beyond that some corrupt, power hungry, materialistic, and deluded folks got their hands on and manipulated what he was about and taught?  

 Why can you not separate the Yeshua from the religion which sprung up around him after he left the public scene.   Why do you constantly ignore that most of those sources i mentioned were extremely non religious.  

Christian religion became primarily loopy after the Roman state got its hands on it, and after persecuting the original and real Christians, and this was centuries after Christ left the public scene.  

  I would not try to convince anyone of anything that was just my own personal belief and guidance message.   To me that is arrogance and possible delusion.   But when so many other non religious, psychic, etc. sources speak for him, I do add my own small voice to the bunch and tell people "hey, maybe there is something to this" in the hopes that they might critically examine their beliefs irrespective of religion.  I suggest that perhaps those like David Icke and Val are perhaps rather off in this area.

 Can i say it any more plainly that one doesn't have to be religious at all to deeply respect, love, feel gratitude towards, and believe in the example of Yeshua.  Just as many of those sources i mentioned were not religious in the least bit.  

 Why the disconnect there?  Why the repeated similar statements re: religion in regards to Yeshua, his teachings and example?

hawkeye wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2009 at 1:13pm:

We all know what "preaching" will get you when you continually direct it towards your wife or husband. Many times you end up drinking your morning coffee by yourself. No body wants to live a life of belittlement to feed over inflated egos. We can go through a number of lifetimes having to repeat the lessons we just haven't had the opportunity or fortitude to learn. Isn't that why we are here? To learn. With God within all of us, then looking within instead of towards others for direction and truth, might be a good place to start.

 Ah, the one of purity speaking on living purely.  The one who believes there is nothing wrong with contributing to the torture and murder of animals that feel both acute physical pain and emotional fear, much like we humans do.

It is perhaps a detriment to those who are very self honest and very honest/sincere with others, that others will try to use that against them in some manner.  

 I could be like many others i've tuned into, i could lie or self delude, i could be insincere, i could twist the truth, i could not speak how i really feel...but then i wouldn't be myself--a Jupitarian from Jupiter, those of the Just and sincere, just as my name implies.   :D  ;D

 Joe, i bow deeply to your expression and example of pure enLightenment, may we all come to know and especially live such undistorted and pure truth as you.  

 What, doth i sense a hint of sarcasm and insincerity on my part?  Oops, guess i'm not always as sincere as i pointed myself out to be earlier.

Justin,
"So i feel so much gratitude, deep respect, and love to him that it sometimes bothers me when people degrade him in some manner. To me, to say that he is nothing but an astral construct created by the collective religious beliefs is pretty derogatory."

You like apples. I like oranges, and I'm not afraid of stating that opinion, no matter how much you love apples. If you thought oranges were astral constructs, and I found that derogatory, whose problem would that be? My problem. But I could try to make it your problem to by using guilt if I didn't like your opinion.

"In some ways, degrading Yeshua/his Disk-- its like a person cruelly hurting a happy, helpful, beautiful golden retriever puppy which is so pure and innocent.  It doesn't matter to me sometimes that both the dog and Yeshua always forgive these hurts, because it just so bothers me at times because it is so unbelievably wrong to do something like that to any aspect of Creation but especially intolerable when that aspect is as pure, loving, and helpful as they are."

..and out of the velvet glove comes the iron fist; hammer time. This goes to show light polarity is equally controlling as dark polarity, dressed differently though. Dark polarity is quite obvious for some. Light loves to use guilt. To what end (for both polarities)? Control. In this case - don't state your opinions, because they hurt cute puppies.

"By extension, its like slapping and spitting in Source and all its selves in the face. I believe that if more people really knew what he was about, they would at least speak up for him though they wouldn't necessarily debate others re: him like i have."

I rest my case. No offence taken though. It's your opinions, and I won't stop you from having them.

Thank you Justin, I am not as deserving as you might feel I am. No, no, I sense no sarcasm nor insensearty from you that I haven't felt for the past few years. Why you haven't changed at all.
I believe strongly about the torture of animals. Of course I feel strongly about the torture of all living things, not just the beings. I wonder if Jesus was a vegetarian? Of course if he wasn't, perhaps another re-write could be in order. Of course I wonder why God put those animals here in the first place. Or why we, as in his image, have a necessity to eat. So many questions yet to be answered. Perhaps I am not as enlightened as you believe me to be. But thank you for all the sensearty that I have grown to expect from your posts.
(I wonder what my name implies? Joseph, hmm)  

Joseph means "Jehovah increases." See the Related Link.

Gender: Male
Origin: Hebrew

Meaning: God Will Increase

The word Joseph has a Hebrew origin, meaning "Jehovah or God increases." It is one of the most popular first names and surnames in the world with as many as 44 variants of which some of the popular one are Joe, Jose (Spanish version), Jodi, Josef, Giuseppe etc. In Arabic, the word Joseph is spelt as Yusuf.

The Old Testament shows Joseph as one of the 12 patriarchs of Israel and the son of Jacob. He was sold by his brothers into slavery because their father was partial in giving Joseph a coat of varied colours. The New Testament shows Joseph as a carpenter and the earthly father of the son of God Jesus Christ. Joseph also refers to an outer garment, worn as a long riding coat with a little cape, used by women in the 18th century.

And because Robert started this thread and my brother's name was Robert:
http://baby-names.familyeducation.com/name-meaning/robert

Robert--- I truely hope that this thread of 7 pages has help you!  Love and Light-- Carol Ann

I figure this conversation isn't accomplishing much, so I'm out of it.

It doesn't seem to matter how logical or non-logical our words are, in the end people believe what they want to believe.

In the future I'm considering the approach of stating what my experiences have been, and limiting the logical arguments.

My intentions are always good, but I don't want to make the mistake of being too pushy.

 Joe, it is much easier to become a vegetarian than it is to become a Breatharian, but as i said, i am working towards the latter and hope to realize that within this life.  Ever hear the term "lesser of evils", or the term relativity, well this seems to apply to this whole issue.  

 Jesus..well i'm not completely sure what he ate and didn't eat.  My sense is that for part of his life, he did eat some fish,a nd maybe was told to eat lamb and like when growing up.  To eat fish, is the lesser of the evils of eating flesh, for fish dont seem to experience emotional fear like some mammals and humans do.  Rosiland's guidance mentions that fish is lighter in vibration than beef or pork for example, and thus has less of a detrimental affect on the human system.

 I believe that Yeshua became a Breatharian, just like He/She of Monroes 3rd book.  

 There is an interesting and rather old book called the "Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ" written by an interesting and service oriented person who went by the name of Levi.  While i dont' agree with this book 100 percent, my guidance has let me know that there is much truth in it despite some occasional skewing and misinterpreation on Levi's part.

 Levi could supposedly read the "akashic records" while conscious.  In one part, describing the youth of Jesus, he states that when young Jesus heard the cries of the animals that were being sacrificed in the name of God, he became very upset and disturbed by the whole thing.  He tried to convince one of the Rabbis that what they were doing was wrong, and that animals shouldn't suffer because of mistaken ideas.  The one Rabbi was pretty touched by the sincerity and degree of perception of young Yeshua, and agreed with him that humans were still yet very barbaric in nature.

 So if this book is true on this point, it points to the truth that Yeshua was very sensitive to the suffering of animals, and probably didn't contribue much at all to their acute suffering.    So i would not be surprised if he at some point became vegetarian, and I do know he eventually became a Breatharian.  

 But, it has become glaringly obvious that you deeply desire to stay stuck within your beliefs re: eating meat and thus contributing to the suffering of beings which feel acute pain and emotional fear.   I love you no less for it, but it is a stuck belief/perception and one you continue to hold to because you are overly attached to your habits.  

 Compassion needs to be active, not passive and anything goes.  I will stop talking to you regarding this issue.  Hopefuly i have planted some subconscious seeds at least.  

recoverer wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2009 at 3:39pm:

I figure this conversation isn't accomplishing much, so I'm out of it. It doesn't seem to matter how logical or non-logical our words are, in the end people believe what they want to believe. In the future I'm considering the approach of stating what my experiences have been, and limiting the logical arguments. My intentions are always good, but I don't want to make the mistake of being too pushy.

 I've been wondering the same thing.  Maybe it is a mistake to try to convince anyone through debate of such issues.  Yet, sometimes i sense it does plant subconscious seeds in some people here and there (rarely the ones you are directly debating with though).  

  I will try to follow your example in the future as well.  Thank you for your input.  

Clean Meat, made good to eat by God
Genesis 18
Luke 11:11-13
Ezekiel 44-46
Isaiah 25:6
Luke 22:15-16
Genesis 9 3&4
Along with countless other passages.
God gave us meat to eat. Its there in black and white.
Most of all God told what was good to eat and what is not.
Lev 11:1 to 11:10
Jesus himself said nothing about eating pork.

Robert,

You probably feel that no one has directly answered your question.  The answer is problematic because of the problem of distinguishing the real Jesus from spirit impersonators, projector thought forms, and sheer imagination.  An astral Jesus that basically quotes Gospel texts and confines his cmmunications to the parameters of Scripture might be suspect on the grounds that "He" is merely an imaginative expression of the projector's wishful thinking.  A Jesus who expresses New Age Ghetto rhetoric that contradicts the historical Jesus must be dismissed as either a spirit impersonator or a mere thought contruct from the projector's preconceptions.  In another thread, I have demonstrated in detail why the Jesus of ACIM is a spirit impersonator, indeed an impersonator that took Helen Schucman's life through the depression psychosis that resulted from her channeling "Jesus."  

So how can we discern "the real" Jesus?  Many atheists with no biblical training encounter Jesus during NDEs.  They are typically upset and tell Jesus something like "But I don't even believe in you!"  To this Jesus typically responds: "But I do believe in you!"  If Jesus proceeds to share teachings that are unknown to the atheist but consistent with biblical teaching, then the real Jesus is probably communicating to transform the atheist's life.    

Apparitions of Jesus often appear to Muslims who despise Christians.  In itself, such encounters lack unique evidential value because the Koran honors Jesus as a virgin-born prophet.  But apparitions of Jesus are a frequent way the Muslims are being converted to Christianity!  Recently a Ugandan children's choir sang in my church.  These children come from a part of Uganda with many Muslims.  A Muslim father of one of theses children  was converted to Christianity through a vision of Jesus.  A leader of this African choir said that Jesus routinely comverts Muslims there to Christianity through such visions.  I have previously posted the account of an Ethiopian Muslim mullah who wanted to kill Christians, but was converted and cured of AIDs through an apparitional encounter with Jesus.  

What is striking about these Muslim conversions is that Jesus never told them that Christianity was superior to Islam.  Rather, the apparition of Jesus itself somehow brought without words the certainty that the Jesus of the Gospels is the true Jesus who is reaching out to them to establish a personal relationship.  One of the best criteria for discerning the real "astral Jesus" are cases in which these astral encounters cannot be explained as either wishful thinking or projected thought forms from the projector's imagination.  

Another excellent criterion is the projector's ability to bring back paranormal verifications of the genuineness of his Jesus' enounter such as a miraculous healing or clairvoyant knowledge of the future.   The astral projector with the best verifications who encounters Christ is the 18th century Swedish mystic, Emanuel Swedenborg.

The most interesting case of an encounter with Jesus in an NDE is atheist Howard Storm's encounter narrated in his gripping book, "My Descent into Death."  Much of Jesus' teaching during this NDE would be dismissed as heretical by many conservative Christians.  But in my view, much of this extra-bibilical teaching can be verified by non-canonical books that we know Jesus admired, but which the projectors have not read.  I am comtemplating a new thread devoted to Storm's book. No one has ever devoted a thread here to Storm's NDE.

I will soon be meeting with a group of atheists and agnostics who are fascinated by such questions and want to meet with me in a church member's home for a bristling discussion.  I look forward to meeting and sharing with these strangers.  I have asked the host to ask them to provide me with a set of burning questions about Christianity and the paranormal so that they (and not I) can set the agenda for our dialogue.

Don

   

Sorry, but I don't consider a "conversion" to Jesus, a conversion to Christianity. And there in lies the rub.

Beau,

In what sense do you feel qualifited to make this distinction?  Can it be that your project a bad experience with particular churches onto an entire movement you know little about?  For example, take my church which is quite typical.

5 days a week we host ministries to the needy--Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Habitat for Humanity. Scouts, and Cubs, and (regularly but not weekly) a Community Blood Drive for our local hospital.  We sponsor a generous Love Fund (free gas and food vouchers; motel rooms, etc.) for the needy poor and provide free lunches for them.  Our people run a youth center for the poor that feeds them regularly and clothes them when they need it.  We take turns preparing the meals.  Our people are helping build a Senior Center for the elderly of all faiths (or none) and currently provide them a weekly lunch at church.  We also bring elderly shut-ins Meals-on-Wheels.  And these are only some of the projects that our small church (125 on Sundays) performs in our town.  It does not include what we do abroad (building schools, etc.).  

OK, Beau, I have two questions for you: (1) How is all this "Christianity," but not Jesus' brand of discipleship?  (2) What are you and other denizens of this site doing that is comparable to our church in demonstrating PUL?   Until you give me some reason to believe otherwise, I will assume that your wedge between Jesus and Christianity is driven without little understanding of either.

Don  

Justin,
"I totally respect that, agree, and its not for me either.  But what does Yeshua and the reality of same, have to do with religion really beyond that some corrupt, power hungry, materialistic, and deluded folks got their hands on and manipulated what he was about and taught?"  

In your opinion, what is the undeluded gist of what he was about, and the uncorrupted teachings?

"Why can you not separate the Yeshua from the religion which sprung up around him after he left the public scene. Why do you constantly ignore that most of those sources i mentioned were extremely non religious."

Of the sources you've mentioned, I enjoy Bob's work. I didn't read anything related to this deity in any of the books. You have a different opinion. Very well.

"Why the disconnect there? Why the repeated similar statements re: religion in regards to Yeshua, his teachings and example?"

By example, are you suggesting following an example? Are the teachings the one true path? What happens is the teachings are ignored?

I'm sorry Berzerk if I offended you. I know as much as christianity as anybody and I don't think Jesus would have been one. He wanted covenant not an excuse to get the church's way in the world. the church (Not all but most) are money machines...Money Changers if you will. You can deny that and say but what about the good works they do but many of them do their good works ultimately to get their tax exemptions. Look. I have nothing against churches I'm just tired of Jesus and Church being synonymous. I don't think it's what he wanted...if he existed and I hope he did, but saying to me---"Oh yeah, Beau, he existed" isn't enough for me. I am on a quest just like the rest on here. How I get there is my choice and more and more I'm learning that the people here really care about my quest as much as I care about theres. The Bible was a Political tool and there is monumental evidence to support that--is it more, of course it is. Do I follow it to the letter...no, I give it the same attention I give the "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare. But I promise I'm not a bad guy who hates Christians. My Girlfriend is devout and I love her and I love the Jesus she worships. There's no discussion to be made here really that I haven't made before...but thanks for coaxing this out of me, Berzerk.

Yours through these many moons,
Beau

Don/Berserk:

I believe that new agers do more to help this World than you think. What's really going to change this World is when enough people live according to love to an extent, where the World's vibrational rate will make it hard for negativity to exist. A lot of new agers might not be interested in scripture, but they are interested in love. There is also the matter of some people performing valuable spirit work that can't be known about in an outer way, but is known about at the spirit level of existence.  I figure a lot of new agers are the people who perform such work.

I believe it is great that your church provides the services it provides; however, it isn't the only way to provide service.

 I completely agree with Albert.  

 Don, sometimes i do wish there was more "holistic" service going on in the New Age world myself.  

 I use to be temporarily part of a group of people interested in "consciousness".   Much of our time was spent in discussing and theorizing about various nonphysical subjects.  

  I often wished there was more meditation involved, and also service to others on the physical plane.  I tried to jumpstart some stuff along that line, but not many seemed that interested.  That was a bit off putting to me at the time.  

 But i do agree w/ Albert, some, or many folks in the New age world do provide nonphysical service, and some are already in service type jobs and like myself don't have much time or money to contribute a lot to more physical service outside of our jobs.  

   Our American system is set up in a way that makes it difficult on people to contribute in that manner on their own, unless they become involved with an organization like your Church or they are more well off or more energetic than the average.

  It's not hard to get why some people just don't want to go there (being involved with a church) having been put off by the constant hearing of "sinner", "going to hell", "must believe or else something bad will happen to you", etc. type pronouncements which have been fairly common in history throughout the religious Christian world.  I know this doesn't pertain to you and your church, but its been common enough and i experienced some of that when i went to TEC and from "friends" in same.  One friend kept telling me that i was being influenced by Satan because of my non-mainstream and non religious beliefs.   Kind of a "turn off", but not too much because she had a brain tumor and could be rather unstable at times because of same.

 But, i do believe that holistic service is the most effective way, and one that Yeshua epitomized in his life and teachings.  If we are to grow to his "level", then we too need to follow in his footsteps, living the perfect, balanced way of service to others.

[Beau:] "He wanted covenant not an excuse to get the church's way in the world."
___________
Holy Communion expresses the New Covenant prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31-34 and elsewhere.  Beyond that "covenant" is not a major theme in Jesus' teaching.

[Beau:] "I know as much as christianity as anybody.
and I don't think Jesus would have been one."
________________________________________________
Really?  You don't even seem to know tha basics!  You apparently don't even realize that Jesus Himself established the church:
"I tell you, you are Peter [whose name means "rock" in Aramaic] and on this rock I will built MY CHURCH, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.  And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 16:17-19)."

Jesus established the church to spread His teachings: "Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I commanded you.  And surely I am with you always to the very end of the age (Matthew 28:16-20)."

Jesus established the criterion by which unbelievers could recognize true Christianity--the mutual love among Christians: "As I have loved you, you must love one another.  By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you love each other (John 13:24-25)."  We attract new members because local people are impressed by all the practical ways our members express their love for each other.

[Beau:] "The church (Not all but most) are money machines...Money Changers if you will...many of them do their good works ultimately to get their tax exemptions."
_______________________
Ministries to the poor and needy cost money.  Christians who love the poor gladly donate to express their love of God and humanity.  The essence of prejudice is to stereotype a whole race or organization on the basis of its worst exemplars. Your spiritual quest is worthless unless you grasp the significance of this insight.  By the way, we have two Sunday services.  The first one attracts pre-Christians; so we don't even take up an offering in that service!  Many churches ask uncommitted spiritual seekers NOT to feel obligated to donate money!

Good works have nothing to do with a church's tax exempt status.  It is tax exempt by virtue of its status as a religious organization.

[Beau:] "I'm just tired of Jesus and Church being synonymous. I don't think it's what he wanted...if he existed and I hope he did, but saying to me---"Oh yeah, Beau, he existed" isn't enough for me.
__________________________
Obviously, you don't know the case for Jesus' existence.  Are you even open-minded enough to care whether such proof is available?  I can provide such a demonstration from Jewish and archaeological sources and sources in direct contact with Jesus' disciples.  I can also expose you to the ancient version of Jesus' life circulated by His detractors!

Yours till the deserts freeze and the camels come skating home,

Don

Don, I question whether Jesus existed in the sense he is portrayed in the bible. I question it because the evidence asks me to question it. Being open minded is being open minded. If you don't get that about me then too bad, dude. I am not anti Jesus...I am not even anti christian nor would I expect anyone to follow my example. You appear to be on a very high horse where all this is concerned. I'm not going to argue my beliefs with you. And I don't take kindly to personal attacks by your trying to dumb me down. I'm sure you mean it in the best of all possible ways, but I know plenty of people who disagree with me. I'm fine with it. Get over it.

Beau,

You are accountable for the plain meaning of your words and it is this meaning that I have taken seriously.  You made claims about what Jesus taught and what He believed and I have addressed your claims point by point.  It's OK with me that you choose to evade the issues you raise.  It's even intellectually respectable to reject the claim that Jesus performed miracles and rose from the dead, just as it is respectable to deny postmortem survival.  But you raised the issue of whether Jesus' very existence can be established and I engaged that claim.  Say what you mean and mean what you say.  I pressed you on the issues you raise because I wanted to see if you are capable of honest and open dialogue.  Such dialogue can require a lot of research and I don't like to argue for the sake of arguiing.  I am putting myself out for the atheist/ agnostic group that iinvited me because I determined that they are serious about learning new ways to handle vexing questions about the paranormal and the afterlife.

Don

If Proof is what you expect me to buy into then you are barking up the wrong tree. I love Jesus, but not because of Christianity. Give me some irrefutable proof and I will give it up. I have never in my 47 years read or seen anything that indicates that Jesus existed. That does not not mean I refuse the Christ. And I am not saying Jesus didn't exist. I am questioning--period. <---that is the end of that sentence. I don't mean to be an ass. But if you are going to make an argument please tell me something that is evidence. I'm not interested what is refuted on this score. A person has the right not to be bullied into acceptance of Dogma that was devised by a group of people who were seeking control of the masses. Christianity, on its face is not what I am looking for. I didn't come to this board to find some else's idea of Jesus living upon the earth. I came to research the afterlife. My opinions are only that. Your evidence is suspect. Surely there is a possibility that Jesus lived and did all that he did. I don't think that's as important as what I feel today. And what you feel too. We are ONE, ultimately that's the only argument that interests me. If you say we are not one then I would take issue with that. Otherwise to each his own. I've had a very large beer, so please take that into consideration when you read this. I"m not mad, I just get tired of putting up an opinion and endlessly having to defend it. Is that all we do here?

It sounds like you would be interested in a thread on patterns of Jesus' words and deeds manifested in NDEs and the extent to which these patterns confirm or deviate from the Jesus of Scripture.  As I see it, atheist Howard Storm's book "My Descent into Death" has the richest "astral Jesus" material.  But the NDE that started the modern NDE movement (psychiatrist George Richie's NDE) is also useful.

Don

Perhaps, but I'm really on a different frequency. No offense intended in that remark. It may be the wrong frequency, but I have to follow this drummer today...well, I want to. I'm into the journey and I believe the destination will make itself known as I grow. Each day my understanding increases and I'm not here to convince anyone, just to see what up, you know.

Yours,
Beau

Beau,

Fair enough.  I initially came to this site because I was excited about mastering astral projection and performing retrievals.  I had perfomed a very emotionally powerful retrieval of an old girlfriend who committed suicide.  Then I learned to develop my skills in lucid dreaming and became convinced that my retrieval and my other OBEs were merely lucid dreams about OBEs with no relevance to spiritual realms.  In a lucid dream you know that you are dreaming in the dream and that insight makes everything incredibly real and well defined.  I learned that leading experts on lucid dreams dismiss OBEs as misunderstood lucid dreams.   So then I became obsessed with the question of whether retrievals and partnered astral exploration could provide convincing verifications. After hanging around this site for several years and reading all the reports on such experiences, I became convinced that none of thsee reports are genuine. The verifications are not what you would expect from the real thing and the deafening silence of unmet expectations seemed to refute such claims.  For this reason, I abandoned this site and will probably do so again once the novelty of my return and the lack of exciting new verifications fails to materialize here. Still, it is fun to create a lucid dream of floating up near the ceiling and looking down on your sleeping body, even if you later realize it isn't real!

Don

"Real", Man that's a whole other can of worms in a way, but I hear what you're saying. Good luck to you Don, and thanks for Conversing with me.

Beau:

Regarding retrievel verifications, different people have different roles to play in this game of life. I'm not surprised that Don didn't become involved with retrievels in a way he could confirm, because he seems to have a different role to play in life. If a person wants to open up to the World of spirit so he or she can help out, he or she needs to be willing to let go of the beliefs that prevent he or she from doing so. If a person comes to the conclusion that unless what they experience in the spirit World closely matches what the Bible says, something demonic must be in play, it is possible this person won't have the openess of spirit that will enable he or she to make contact with the spirit World in a way that is significant enough for he or she to help with retrievels.

When it comes to the retrievel work I do, I've helped all kinds of beings. I don't believe it is my place to judge them. If the light beings I work with figure a spirit needs help, that's good enough for me. Early on in the process I received some verifications that let me know that what I was experiencing was beyond my imagination. Once I became certain of the fact that I'm working with beings who represent the light, it became unnecessary for me to keep obtaining verifications. I've found that the light beings I work with aren't going to get me involved with something unless there is a reason to do so. It would be unreasonable and impracticle for me to expect them to repeatedly come up with information that can be verified.

I don't believe it is about satisfying the cynics with all kinds of empirical evidence. It is more of a matter of some people wanting to help so much, that they are willing to let go of their limiting ideas to an extent, so they can find out how things actually are.

You can't get an accurate reading of what it is like to make contact with spirit beings by reading a bunch of books and picking and choosing according to what matches up with your pre-existing beliefs. You have to be willing to put yourself on line, take a chance, have some faith that light beings will be there for you if you have good intentions, and give it a goooooooooooo.

Excellent post albert thanks

recoverer, it rairly gets better put than how you have put it. What I experience retrieval wise is verified to me. I have no doubts about the authenticity. Don seems to have a  "need" for proof before he can believe in retrievals.
I have also had the opportunity to have my life touched personally by God. There is no doubt about the experience happening. Yet "proof"...there is none.  How do I prove it. I believe that some, like Don, are still on their search but have yet to find what they are looking for. I was fortunate enough to just open my heart, and he was there.      

Don said:

"The verifications are not what you would expect from the real thing and the deafening silence of unmet expectations seemed to refute such claims.  For this reason, I abandoned this site and will probably do so again once the novelty of my return and the lack of exciting new verifications fails to materialize here. Still, it is fun to create a lucid dream of floating up near the ceiling and looking down on your sleeping body, even if you later realize it isn't real."

Don, you were missed in your absence.  I should point out that this site has much to offer beyond verifications of retrievals in the physical world.  And you add to the forum when speaking of your own congregation or scholarship.  What we have is a meeting of minds.  An exchange of ideas.  And you share many values and ideas with us.  You know of concepts such as "as above, so below" and "like attracts like."  These ideas have been stated in many different sources, but as we hash them out on this forum, we each come to our own understanding about the meaning of sentience and consciousness.  We find ways to understand PUL, and cut through the hype.

I guess I'm trying to say that if the verifications in the physical were all anyone was after, this forum wouldn't be the right place.  There are few Swedenborgs around these days.  I've heard of some gifted individuals with amazing verifications, mediums and others, but while the individual verifications may be inspiring, it doesn't make you directly experience your own epiphany.

In brief, do stay for a while Don, when it suits you, for the right reasons.  We are a group of individual souls, sharing, learning and exchanging in an open forum.  And you bring with you your own irascible, yet charming way...

Matthew

If posting this offends I apologize in advance it's just where I am and it was inspired by this thread.

Everyone But You

I'll let you have your Jesus, if you let me have mine
Cause I know my opinion to you ain't worth a dime
I get so tired of arguing all ways back and forth
You don't have to see it my way to pass this earthly course

I'll let you have your Jesus, if you let me have mine
I know when these words fly between us we're losing track of time
He created something special in those three years
Made an impression on me and taught me not to fear

Things are pretty simple in the eyes I see thru
I'll stick to my plan if it's alright with you
You ask me if I'm saved, then you ask me if I'm true
I'll tell you right now darlin I've been saved from everyone but you

Look into my eyes baby and know that I'm for real
I've got real eyes to realize it's exactly how I feel
Things don't happen in time and space unless you got the bug
While we're down here working it out it's like getting hit by a truck

I'll let you have your Jesus, if you let me have mine
Okay, we don't have to talk about it, lets just unwind
The truth here is spherical that much I know for sure
We can't see eye to eye when each takes a stand that must endure

My real eyes focus inside my head if I can be so blunt
I don't need science or religion for this particular scavenger hunt
I go on what rings true from the inside out in my mind
I've had some of these lessons before and I just can't waste the time

Perhaps I should try to elaborate on the depths of my feelings and skepticism about retrievals.  In my mind, no one longs more intensely than I for retrievals to be genuine.  At its core, early Christianity originally implied this philosophy: None of us ultimately "make it" unless we all make it.  To love you means that I consider your success my success and your failure my failure.  I cannot feel fulfillment in my anticipated postmortem bliss if any who have crossed my path do not share this bliss in their own way.  Personal ego must give way to a sense that I am "everyman"--no better and no worse.  I must look at life from the perspective that I could have loved others more wisely or intensely to motivate them to find a path to bliss that works for them.  Of course, this idealism is tempered by the harsh reality of my limitations in both understanding and spiritual capability.  But the prospect of retrievals creates the most noble dream imaginable-the draem -that love NEVER needs to give up on anyone.  

How then did these feelings affect my months of elation after "retrieving" Janet and my ultimate realization that I had not done so?  I was a workaholic doctoral student when I dated her.  The pressures of my study load prevented me from discerning the warning signals that she was too chronically depressed for me to marry her.  She was not ultimately right for me, and so, we broke up on the brink of engagement.  I mishanded the termination of that relationship and can only say that sometimes you grow up at the expense of people you love.  

Naturally I was deeply concerned about her fate after she shot herself.  So imagine my relief when I retrieved her. In my passionate embrace she kept saying, "I'm OK, Sweetie, I'm OK! I'm OK!"  Her reassurance was great for my peace of mind and self-image.  But gradually I began to ask, "But was it great for Janet?  That's all that matters."  Then this sickening realization crept into my mind: we humans desperately need relief from sorrow and fear.  Our most important beliefs are unavoidably shaped by wishful thinking.  If I really did retrieve Janet, then she is OK.  But if I merely had a lucid retreival dream, then she may not be OK.  Since her wellbeing matters more than my feelings of relief, the pain of skepticism seemed the inevitable outcome of my love for Janet.  When I die, one of my top prirorites will be to seek her out and discover her true fate.  

It may sound odd, but I believe that some issues are too important to be believed without verification.  True love demands more than faith in mystical experiences; it requires the highest level of certitude possible that the best interests of our loved ones are served.  True, that certitude can be mystical rather than evidential.  Paradoxically, it is my very longing for tthe gneuineness of this site's retrievals that makes me so skeptical!  My insistence on verifcaiton is my way of loving Janet.

Don      

"The first shall be the last'. I absolutely believe that, Don. I see where you are coming from now. I just believe that reliance on the imagination is somewhat scorned by Big Religions Fore Fathers. And that without it one is lost to a belief system that is untended by the Christ Light.

And I understand wanting proof, but to me in this case the proof is personal to the experiencer because true reality still comes from perception and when in C1 we can't completely share that. I believe that dreams are as real as experience here just different. How much of your waking life are you aware of while within your dreams that aren't lucid? It is another expression of Consciousness, dreams are. But why should that make it any less real, just because you can't appear to share it with another as you can your experience in C1. You can't explain your waking life very well in your dreams either...at least I can't. So just some thoughts. I don't know about retrievals really. I've only done one and it didn't go swimmingly or anything like that, but it seemed real and I wasn't making it up that I'm aware of, but when I got back to C1 I couldn't tell really. Because of my lack of experience I have wondered if Retrievals are necessary or if they are busy work...I'm still not sure, but many at this site seem to take them very seriously and I respect that.

Thank you Beau and Hawkeye.

Don--- contact me. I may have some information for you from Janet. I would like to keep it personal. --Carol Ann

identcat@pctnh.net

 Don, regarding your imaginary Retrieval with Janet, you bring up some good points, but it seems you are projecting your personal experiences too much into a more universal sense.  

  As you mentioned, there was a lot of deep emotional attachment going on with you in relation to Janet.  

 Yet, most people here who perform retrievals, of are retrieving strangers with whom they have no deep, emotional connection with, hence there is less intrinsic reason for unconsciously making it up or what not.  Yes, there may be other unconscious attachments involved, and i likewise have gotten the sense that not all retrievals reported here were genuine spiritual experiences, but there are plenty that i've sensed were.  

 It seems you need to get out of your left brain side a bit, and learn more to feel what's going on.  Yes, i know you have had some powerful mystical experiences, i'm not doubting that, but you strike me as someone who spends a lot of time being polarized overly much to the left brain side of things.   Your deep need for physically related proof of such spiritual matters speaks of that.  

 Kind of remind me of doubting Thomas as bit.  I don't remember Yeshua saying that one must constantly seek for proof in relation to Retrievals or any spiritual phenomena beyond the you shall know true and truly spiritual experiences by their fruits.  

 I haven't had a lot of verifications with retrievals.  Actually i haven't done all that many while conscious in the sense that Bruce Moen talks about.  I tend to have quite a lot of retrieval oriented dreams, and it may be that like Albert i'm involved in some more automatic, unconscious type retrieval work.   I have wondered about this, before i heard of Alberts descriptions.  

 While this is not a hard core verification (i.e. names, dates, etc later verified), this is one of my experiences which led me to believe that what happened after was a retrieval.

 I moved into a new place.  I started to feel feelings of depression, anger, etc. beyond my norm.  At one point while getting relaxed and on the verge of sleep i heard from a distinctly male sounding voice, "Get out!"  
  Putting 2 and 2 together, i realized that i probably was living in a place that a stuck person was attached to.   I didn't seek any verifcations, because i deeply believe in the reality of all this kind of stuff, but anyways i brought up the White Light within self, and projected that out to this person.  I told him that he wasn't physical anymore and that it was ok to move on, i told him to go to the light.  

 Well, didn't seem to work the first time during the first meditation.  I still vaguely felt him around and how i know that i can't explain.   I tried a couple more times and finally felt him leave.  

 Later on, through a neighbor, i found out that there was a family that lived in my place.  The man got cancer, became extremely depressed and angry, and part of of the reason was because he couldn't help contribute to the welfare of his family.   In his despair (and possibly physical pain), he shot himself in the head while in that house.  

 Again, probably not to be considered a hard core verification, but certainly suggestive when taken as a whole.  

 I also know that you are extremely skeptical of reincarnation, more so of that then retrievals, but i have what i consider to be a more hard core verification in that field.  For me personally, it was a very powerful experience with too many "coincidences" and synchronicities happening at the same time, that it pretty much voncinved me of the reality of reincarnation despite some off and on doubting re: it (and particularly to who i'm connected to).  

 Please keep in mind that i don't believe in the traditional model of reincarnation, but more similar to Bruce Moens Disk and Bob Monroes I/there concepts, wherein a greater self exists out of time/space and projects aspects of itself in physical dimension for various reasons (from addiction, to wanting to balance karma, to curiosity, etc.).   Once a Disk gets stuck in relation to this physical world experience, it can be difficult to completely unattach from.  

 In a sense, beyond our left brain, material understanding, these incarnations and projections of the Greater self, happen simultaneously.  

 To be more specific, they happen simultaneously from the perspective of Pure Spirit.  To "levels" "below" that, there are various relative "times" involved.  Physical time is based on the belief and perception of pure separation.   Hence we even perceive a separation in time and oft categorize it as past, present, and future.  

 Since in reality (a reality of underlying Oneness) there is no separation between any energies and consciousnesses this is why physical, linear time could be called an "illusion".   Since each level "up" from and faster vibrating in nature than the physical, there is less and less belief and experience of separation, then linear time perception changes accordingly.  

It's interesting to note that when one is focussed in the physical a lot, there is a perception of a lot of movement and constant change.  

 The few times in deep meditation wherein i consciously perceived the pure White Light and total, all encompassing Love and Divinity, it felt like i was experiencing all of eternity in one moment, but in a way that it felt completely STILL.  

 Yet, vibrational wise, the physical is the slowest vibrating dimension, and pure Spirit is the fastest vibrating Consciousness.

 Strange how they flip flop in perception like that--a clue to the mirror like reflection and ultimate non reality of the physical perhaps?  Anyways, hope to see you on my "reincanration thread" wherein i talk about what to me seemed to be a pretty convincing verification.  

Just  set the record straight, Doubting Thomas refers to Thomas, who doubted Christ's resurrection without seeing the wounds:

"The term is based on the Biblical account of Thomas the Apostle, who doubted the resurrection of Jesus and demanded to feel Jesus' wounds before being convinced (John 20:24-29), although the Bible does not mention if actual contact took place. After seeing Jesus alive and being offered the opportunity to touch his wounds — according to the author of the Gospel of John — Thomas professed his faith in Jesus; on this account he is also called Thomas the Believer.

You're right Matthew. I remembered this, and hoped to rush to the forum and correct my post, but you beat me to it. Thanks. :(


DocM wrote on Feb 6^th, 2009 at 3:42pm:

Just  set the record straight, Doubting Thomas refers to Thomas, who doubted Christ's resurrection without seeing the wounds: "The term is based on the Biblical account of Thomas the Apostle, who doubted the resurrection of Jesus and demanded to feel Jesus' wounds before being convinced (John 20:24-29), although the Bible does not mention if actual contact took place. After seeing Jesus alive and being offered the opportunity to touch his wounds — according to the author of the Gospel of John — Thomas professed his faith in Jesus; on this account he is also called Thomas the Believer.

Hello all!

Haven't been here in a few months. I hope everyone is well.  
For those who are interested, I would like to make a contribution to the subject in question, that of Jesus Christ, by way of some links to material I feel is relevant to the subject and may be useful to some here in that regard, along with some introductory remarks.

The below links are excerpts from "Essays on the Gita" by Sri Aurobindo. As I often preface when recommending Sri Aurobindo, he is not an easy read for most, but at the same time his writings can be well worth the required effort for the depth and clarity of knowledge that is available. In his discussion on each chapter, Sri Aurobindo explains both the surface meanings, and the deeper import of the original passages in a way that can be useful not only as commentary, but in its own right as instruction/illumination for the contemporary seeker. Also, aspirants who have not read the Gita should not be discouraged from investigating this material by Sri Aurobindo, as it may even serve as a cogent and authoritative introduction to a text that many Westerners (and Christ followers) sometimes avoid as being too exotic or even irrelevant to their seeking. However, as the below may ultimately demonstrate, there may be much more available than mere surface appearance suggests.

For those not familiar with the Gita (or Bhagavad Gita - Celestial Song), it is widely considered one of the greatest works of world spiritual literature. It is an instruction containing the colloquy between Godhead as personified by Krishna, and the world disciple or aspiring Humanity as personified by Arjuna. Basically, each chapter is a progressively built teaching as to the nature of reality, the intrinsic problems without, and different solutions within. (note to AK members: in some places there are occasional instructions on the process of death/dying). The Gita itself is contained within and a very small part of the much larger Mahabharata epic, but that is literally (npi) another story entirely....

Getting to the original intent in providing the links are the specific chapters below dealing with the appearance of an Avatar or "Incarnation" on Earth - - the what, why, how, when, etc., which Krishna reveals to Arjuna in the Gita.   Although the Gita is ostensibly about the specific appearance of Krishna as He was the Avatar of the era in which the Gita takes place, so too the Christ was a manifestation of the same phenomenon in a later time, also embodying the universal Truth, and indeed Sri Aurobindo mentions the Christ/Christianity illustratively in his commentary at least two dozen times in the 3 chapters linked below regarding such divine manifestations. The commentary therefore has the potential to provide a deeper understanding of the concepts, meanings, significance, the Reality of Jesus Christ as an Avatar in this exposition that, to the open minded reader may be quite unique, inspiring, and expanding on currently held beliefs, Christian or not. I can honestly say that this has been abundantly true in my case. Included in these essays are also found discussions on various common conceptions, misconceptions and refutations of the premise and reality of avatarhood, since as is characteristic with Aurobindo's writings, he is is generously thorough in managing to quite often interpose "the reader's" own questions and views as a basis for explanation and comment.

Of course, beyond these few chapters which here are out of the contextual flow of both the "Gita" itself, and "Essays On...", I would also recommend the entire texts of both/either as very possibly enlightening and rewarding, certainly moreso together, but the material referenced below will give a good introduction nevertheless.

If anyone would be interested in pursuing this further and wants a recommendation on (imo) a good version of the Bhagavad Gita - beware, there are many, many bad versions, some quite atrociously and unintelligently translated and therefore a waste of time for the contemporary Western seeker - I have posted my recommendation here:
http://afterlife-knowledge.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1234119926/0#0
in the "Religions" forum as a good-will gesture vs here in this thread, as I feel that even this post alone, relevant as it is, perhaps is pushing the limits of some members' tolerance in a thread that is supposed to be all about Jesus.  ;)  Such being the case for those most comfortably ensconced the "Judeo-Christian Ghetto" (as one Padre PazzoFurioso2 might put it), references to such "heretical texts" may be considered inflammatory.  ;)  ::)  Be that as it may.....


...as always, I hope this may be enlightening and helpful.

- u


Selected excerpts followed by the links.


excerpt from Sri Aurobindo, Essays on the Gita, Chapter 15, The Possibility and Purpose of Avatarhood
Quote:

For to the modern mind Avatarhood is one of the most difficult to accept or to understand of all the ideas that are streaming in from the East upon the rationalised human consciousness. It is apt to take it at the best for a mere figure for some high manifestation of human power, character, genius, great work done for the world or in the world, and at the worst to regard it as a superstition, – to the heathen a foolishness and to the Greeks a stumbling-block. The materialist, necessarily, cannot even look at it, since he does not believe in God; to the rationalist or the Deist it is a folly and a thing of derision; to the thoroughgoing dualist who sees an unbridgeable gulf between the human and the divine nature, it sounds like a blasphemy. The rationalist objects that if God exists, he is extracosmic or supracosmic and does not intervene in the affairs of the world, but allows them to be governed by a fixed machinery of law, – he is, in fact, a sort of far-off constitutional monarch or spiritual King Log, at the best an indifferent inactive Spirit behind the activity of Nature, like some generalised or abstract witness Purusha of the Sankhyas; he is pure Spirit and cannot put on a body, infinite and cannot be finite as the human being is finite, the ever unborn creator and cannot be the creature born into the world, – these things are impossible even to his absolute omnipotence. To these objections the thoroughgoing dualist would add that God is in his person, his role and his nature different and separate from man; the perfect cannot put on human imperfection; the unborn personal God cannot be born as a human personality; the Ruler of the worlds cannot be limited in a nature-bound human action and in a perishable human body. These objections, so formidable at first sight to the reason, seem to have been present to the mind of the Teacher in the Gita when he says that although the Divine is unborn, imperishable in his self-existence, the Lord of all beings, yet he assumes birth by a supreme resort to the action of his Nature and by force of his self-Maya; that he whom the deluded despise because lodged in a human body, is verily in his supreme being the Lord of all; that he is in the action of the divine consciousness the creator of the fourfold Law and the doer of the works of the world and at the same time in the silence of the divine consciousness the impartial witness of the works of his own Nature, – for he is always, beyond both the silence and the action, the supreme Purushottama. And the Gita is able to meet all these oppositions and to reconcile all these contraries because...

excerpt from Sri Aurobindo, Essays on the Gita, chapter 16, The Process of Avatarhood

Quote:

...that the Lord of all existence thus takes upon himself the human birth. This doctrine is a hard saying, a difficult thing for the human reason to accept; and for an obvious reason, because of the evident humanity of the Avatar. The Avatar is always a dual phenomenon of divinity and humanity; the Divine takes upon himself the human nature with all its outward limitations and makes them the circumstances, means, instruments of the divine consciousness and the divine power, a vessel of the divine birth and the divine works. But so surely it must be, since otherwise the object of the Avatar's descent is not fulfilled; for that object is precisely to show that the human birth with all its limitations can be made such a means and instrument of the divine birth and divine works, precisely to show that the human type of consciousness can be compatible with the divine essence of consciousness made manifest, can be converted into its vessel, drawn into nearer conformity with it by a change of its mould and a heightening of its powers of light and love and strength and purity; and to show  also how it can be done. If the Avatar were to act in an entirely supernormal fashion, this object would not be fulfilled. A merely supernormal or miraculous Avatar would be a meaningless absurdity; not that there need be an entire absence of the use of supernormal powers such as Christ's so-called miracles of healing, for the use of supernormal powers is quite a possibility of human nature; but there need not be that at all, nor in any case is it the root of the matter, nor would it at all do if the life were nothing else but a display of supernormal fireworks. The Avatar does not come as a thaumaturgic magician, but as the divine leader of humanity and the exemplar of a divine humanity. Even human sorrow and physical suffering he must assume and use so as to show, first, how that suffering may be a means of redemption, – as did Christ, – secondly, to show how, having been assumed by the divine soul in the human nature, it can also be overcome in the same nature, – as did Buddha. The rationalist who would have cried to Christ, “If thou art the Son of God, come down from the cross,” or points out sagely that the Avatar was not divine because he died and died too by disease, – as a dog dieth, – knows not what he is saying: for he has missed the root of the whole matter. Even, the Avatar of sorrow and suffering must come before there can be the Avatar of divine joy; the human limitation must be assumed in order to show how it can be overcome; and the way and the extent of the overcoming, whether internal only or external also, depends upon the stage of the human advance; it must not be done by a non-human miracle. The question then arises, and it is the sole real difficulty, for here the intellect falters and stumbles over its own limits, how is this human mind and body assumed? ....

The following links are the full chapters from which the above excerpts originate in "Essays on the Gita", by Sri Aurobindo

Chapter 15, The Possibility and Purpose of Avatarhood

http://sriaurobindoashram.info/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_staticcontent%5csriaurobindoashram%5c-09+e-library%5c-01+works+of+sri+aurobindo%5c-01+english%5c-13_essays+on+the+gita-volume-13%5c-17_the+possibility+and+purpose+of+avatarhood.htm

Chapter 16,  The Process of Avatarhood

http://www.sriaurobindoashram.org.in/Content.aspx?ContentURL=/_staticcontent/sriaurobindoashram/-09%20e-library/-01%20works%20of%20sri%20aurobindo/-01%20english/-13_essays%20on%20the%20gita-volume-13/-18_The%20Process%20of%20Avatarhood.htm


Chapter 17,  The Divine Birth and Divine Works

http://www.sriaurobindoashram.org.in/Content.aspx?ContentURL=/_staticcontent/sriaurobindoashram/-09%20e-library/-01%20works%20of%20sri%20aurobindo/-01%20english/-13_essays%20on%20the%20gita-volume-13/-19_The%20Divine%20Birth%20and%20Divine%20Works.htm

Hi,

I've been informed that the links provided in the above post may not/do not work/only work sometimes, and i have confirmed this. I apologize for any inconvenience or frustration as I tested these after making the post and they all did work at the time.  :-/  Perhaps it is a site/server issue. At any rate, I  have only now had time to try to remedy this, and since I evidently cannot edit the above post...

...Here is the link below for the entire table of contents for the book sited. You will have to find the three chapters listed above by title in the table. If this link does not work, try doing a site search or some other navigation to get the chapters in question.
Good luck...

Best regards,

- u

Table of contents for "Essays on the Gita"
http://www.sriaurobindoashram.org.in/Contents.aspx?ParentCategoryName=%5c_staticcontent%5csriaurobindoashram%5c-09+e-library%5c-01+works+of+sri+aurobindo%5c-01+english%5c-13_essays+on+the+gita-volume-13

Hi Beau,

Are your lyrics/ the poem set to music yet?
:D :D I hope they will be !!

Bets

When I get it done I'll post it on my myspace http://myspace.com/beau145 Thanks for asking Bets!!