We have been told by a few different sources, and some of have been information that agrees, that this Reality and Uni/Multi-verse (with all it's varying different but connected dimensions) is but one of many such Realities. 

   Some of these sources have also indicated that there is a Creator Being of this particular Reality, an individual, thinking, feelling, freewilled being. 

  Some sources indicate that this Creator Being is only one of many such. 

  But, what's interesting, is that one source (Edgar Cayce's guidance) that talks about all the above, indicates that the Creator Being of this Reality, was the first of the Children of The Source to remerge with same and become a full companion and co-creator.  Btw, Cayce's guidance at times hints and at times plainly says that the Disk that "Jesus" belongs too, is that Co-Creator Being of this Reality.

  This may mean (actually is likely) that this is the oldest or first of the manifested realities or creative art works out of the many. 

  I don't mean the physical earth, or even the physical in general, but rather this entire Uni/Mult-verse, both physical and nonphysical (a rather "large" place  ;) )

   Interesting then that we find our own dramas and growth within same. 

  This could mean that some of us are some of the original sparks that The Source manifested out from itself, some of whom got lost, and then some of the first Retriever sparks that the Co-Creator Being used Itself as a model to create with the purpose and intent of finding those "accidents" in creation, the lost ones. 

   I wonder could this also mean that some of us, already have aspects of self that have moved into those raw states of Consciousness to become Co-Creator Beings themselves involved in the process of making, enjoying, and/or managing other Realities?

  Or, if we still exist in this larger Reality, does that mean we have not grown to completion to become "Gods" (i prefer Co-Creators) as of yet?

   Anyone ever get any information relating to any of the above?

   Suppose it doesn't matter too much, and not much to be gained to know one way or the other, but interesting to think about nonetheless. 

   I've heard that very occasionally, one of the other Co-Creators gets more directly involved with this particular Reality/Creation. 

  What an interesting and ever macro cosmic larger reality we live in! 

   I look forward to becoming an artist on this scale, a co-creator with The Source.  Tell you what, when we've all made our own little unique Universes, we should have a reunion party at some point, and invite each other over into each others little parcel of the Whole.  Maybe even some practical jokes... (but no real interfering with the creations evolving in same). 

 

Wow Justin, that post is so you.

As for me, I have enough unfinished projects around the house without getting started on creating universes.

1796 wrote on Feb 10^th, 2014 at 8:29am:

As for me, I have enough unfinished projects around the house without getting started on creating universes.

  I hear yah..   Also have some work to do before this Disk i'm part of can move into the next level of this process of Consciousness expansion. 

  But i really do very strongly intuit that both The Source and the Co-Creator being of this Reality, hope and wish that we will grow up fully so that we all can move into this role. 

   My strong feeling is that they long for us to be fully conscious companions with them, and look forward to when we will help expand the Whole in a similar, but in our own unique, manner  Course, they are very patient about all of this. 

   I think this is what all of this is geared too, all the different incarnations, all the different dimensions, all the retrieving, all the suffering.  To help us grow into and remember what we are truly and what Sources original intent and hopes for us were (to be fully conscious companions and co-creators with same). 

    We're kind of in a giant play pen until then...until we grow big enough to step over the boundary of same...   ;)  :D 

  When Yeshua associated himself with "the Father" way back when, many of his fellow Jews called him blasphemous and said who are you to consider yourself on par with same. 

   He pointed out to them that in their own religious books by sources they highly respected that it was it written that we are "Gods" (implied is, in the making). 

   Who would know better than he, since it was his Disk, or rather original spark who evolved into same, that co-created ALL of this (and many of us).  And the first of these Co-Creators to arise and take on the mantle that The Source gave as a gift of potential for all of us.   

  Meanwhile, i need to go get grounded.  ::)  (consistent deep meditation plus colloidal gold plus more alkaline diet = woah body!) 

    



 

Some people with a religious perspective might find it odd for there to be big creators other than God.

If such a being has evolved to the point where it has the same abilities and love-based motivation as God, perhaps such co-creatorship isn't a problem.

But where would such a being get the energy to create everything? Would God give it some more energy?

I can't say that I want to become such a creator.  How many universes do we need? If I became one, I'd watch it with that lost probe thing. I wouldn't need a bunch of Adolph Hitler's to make my universe complete. It would suffice to learn from the mistakes made by other creators. If Jesus is the Creator of this universe etc., would he have made the mistake of creating probes that get lost in the way that Bruce Moen described? I believe he would know better than that. After all, Jesus would've been from the Universe that God created beforehand, and the lost probe mistake is more likely to have taken place then.

There is also the factor of in what way does time exist?  If Creators keep creating beings that eventually become Creators (at least, some of them), does this mean that very far in the future there are many beings that have yet to be created? If so, why should they have to wait so long before they get to be a part of existence? If I was them I might complain. ;)

When I speak in this way I mean that regardless of the simultaneous time factor, we always exist now, now, now--with an ever changing state of being. When time is thought of in this manner, and if the process of creating new beings keeps happening, then hypothetically there are many beings that will never be created because the moment when they are created will never come to be.

  Freewill being what it is, temporary imbalance and chaos is a potential in any Creation.  Without potential for "anti" origins, there is no true freewill. 

    Also, i think Bruce's account has some hints, but ones that need to be filled in a bit. 

  In Bruce's account, it was original Consciousness that started this all, what i would call The Source. 

    Some "lost" sparks happened. 

  Isn't it possible that some of these found their way into this reality after the Planning Intelligence (what i would call the Christ Spirit) co-created same?   

  Perhaps these sparks tend to cause a lot of trouble at times? 

   Does that mean it's the fault of the Planning Intelligence, especially if we consider that he was created at the same time or around the same time that they were too?  Nor does it mean it's a fault of The Source, but i think this explains that very odd saying in E.C.'s source about "accidents occasionally happen, even in creation." 

   I don't think this was planned or foreseen, which is why we could refer to it as an "accident".   Notice, it's not necessarily the same as calling it a mistake, for a mistake means error or wrongness implied. 

   Co-creating a Universe might in some ways be like having and birthing a child. 

   The initial process isn't necessarily all peaches and cream, but very fulfilling, and once the baby is born, you have to watch and help, but not interfere too much as so they can become their own person. 

  You "hope" they will grow up to be lovely and kind, BUT no matter what happens, you love them, and if they aren't, you try to help them to become that way without forcing them, but by constant example. 

   The above to me, so explains the meaning of Yeshua's life and why he came here.   Ever being the example for us, and ever calling us to follow in his footsteps. 

  It could be Albert that when we fully grow up, we don't all choose to become Co-Creators in that sense.  Perhaps some of us become content with more being guardians and helpers in some of the various Realities.

  Sort of like super guides.  Perhaps they are given permission by the Co-Creators in same to play these roles? 

    Some folks, by nature, are more active or passive than others.  Maybe the more active ones want to be fully immersed and enmeshed in this creative process while the more passive ones more content to occasionally get involved with pre-created realities. 

   I don't know, but i suspect there is a range.  Anyways, in a sense, all of this is so beyond all of us right now, that there isn't much of any practicality to be thinking about it while focused here.  Without working out our own kinks and fully opening to PUL, we won't move into these roles anyways. 

It's possible that some lost beings moved into PI's universe.

I figure beings go astray because in order for them to be able to create themselves in a free way rather than being like robots, they were initially created without having all of the knowledge that their source has.

If you want to have free will, you have to allow for the possibility that some Souls will mess it up for a while.

  Agreed Albert, which is why i wrote this earlier, "Freewill being what it is, temporary imbalance and chaos is a potential in any Creation.  Without potential for "anti" origins, there is no true freewill."

  I intuit that The Source and the Co-Creator beings want true companions, and like you said, not robots or play things.  They, like us, want to love and to be loved and to love and be loved, you have to choose same of your own volition and vice versa.

   This is also why i think we will always retain some sort of individuality and self awareness.  Without that, there also isn't much choice or sharing.   

I agree.


wrote on Feb 10^th, 2014 at 5:00pm:

Agreed Albert, which is why i wrote this earlier, "Freewill being what it is, temporary imbalance and chaos is a potential in any Creation.  Without potential for "anti" origins, there is no true freewill."   I intuit that The Source and the Co-Creator beings want true companions, and like you said, not robots or play things.  They, like us, want to love and to be loved and to love and be loved, you have to choose same of your own volition and vice versa.    This is also why i think we will always retain some sort of individuality and self awareness.  Without that, there also isn't much choice or sharing.

Justin - "Meanwhile, i need to go get grounded.  ::)  (consistent deep meditation plus colloidal gold plus more alkaline diet = woah body!)" 

For me its meditation/prayer, breath, fresh rainwater, pears, salmon, steak and bacon = woah body.

Interesting crossbow.  Don't eat steak or bacon myself, but occasionally eat some salmon. 

  Find it quite grounding compared to any other (non flesh) foods i eat. 

  I would imagine steak and bacon would be even more so.  When i did eat steak, bacon, etc, i use to have less energy.

I could be a vegetarian but I couldn't give up bacon.  :P

Related to the thread topic, could an ant comprehend the lives, roles and relationships of the person/people who own and work the land on which the ant and its fellow ants live?      

Is the difference between the ant and us a lesser difference than the difference between us and the beings you mention?

Is there a way that human comprehension might possibly fathom multiple universes and their dimensions of spacetime and their creation, structure and the beings and their consciousness who are behind them? 

cb

1796 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 5:31pm:

I could be a vegetarian but I couldn't give up bacon.  :P

Haha, wasn't trying to pressure you one way or the other on that one.  Was just stating my experience with the effects of grounding or ungrounding in relation to food. 

  When my wife and i did the Gateway Voyage program at The Monroe Institute, i felt nudged to make some temporary changes in my diet.  While there, i ate mostly vegan and live foods.  It seemed to make a difference.  I can't begin to describe how "light" i felt towards the end of that program.  Course, it was a combo of factors, the energy of the place, the energy melding of the group, the sheer amount and consistency of deeper meditation, etc, and yes i do believe the change in eating contributed too. 


Quote:

Related to the thread topic, could an ant comprehend the lives, roles and relationships of the person/people who own and work the land on which the ant and its fellow ants live?       Is the difference between the ant and us a lesser difference than the difference between us and the beings you mention? Is there a way that human comprehension might possibly fathom multiple universes and their dimensions of spacetime and their creation, structure and the beings and their consciousness who are behind them?  cb

  Good questions, i'm not 100% sure one way or the other.  But here are some knowns, which if taken together as a whole, might suggest some things logically.

  One, we all have the same potential, all being part of The Source, the Light, and Oneness that we exist in. 

   Certainly our human forms and this dimension have a very limiting effect via what i call the affect of co resonation of collective consciousness.  Even if you're an unusually developed and mature consciousness, when incarnated here, you have to deal with that collective force and consciousness which is rather limited as a trend.

    But, those other (Co-Creator) beings we mentioned, seem to exist as personifications or pure channelers of PUL.  Hence, the more a Consciousness within a human form attunes to and opens up more fully and clearly to PUL, the more they can start to perceive that which is similar to them and their state of existence.

  Certainly, didn't Yeshua perceive information about these very large and beyond Earth concepts?  Even before the Resurrection. 

  Can we not do and become similar to him?  Did he not say we could, if we chose and live like him? 

    In a very real sense, because of the reality of Oneness/connectedness, all information and knowledge is within each individual, and it's a matter of attuning to it, and again, when it comes to the very expanded levels of Consciousness, becoming a clear channel of PUL is very, very important and crucial. 

  Whether this is likely for a human at this cycle and point to do, is another question and issue unto itself.  It would likely take a Consciousness who is nearing to it's completion and ready to become one of those Co-Creators itself, to probably truly understand and perceive much info about these processes and realities.

  How many of these are incarnated here now?  Don't know, but doubt the number is all that high.  Maybe in the low hundreds?   

   An outer source that i really respect, "Cosmic Journeys: my out of body experiences with Robert Monroe" written by  Rosiland McKnight, was given information by her guidance during one of these sessions that after the breakdown period, that the highly evolved, Christed Beings would make themselves known among humanity. 

  My intuition is that this includes both some humans and some E.T. groups.  And i think that eventually, Yeshua himself will go public again in the body image he was born with some 2000 years before. 

I know you weren't pressuring me. I wouldn't mind if you were. The written word is hard to impart the spirit of communications. Have you seen the comedian Bill Burr? On audio tape / pod cast he sounds like a bitter twisted angry man, yet see that same performance on video and his smiling eyes and relaxed open body language counter his tone of voice and we can see that he is much more light hearted than he sounds on audio. The written word is like that too, but more so because there is no tone at all and people tend to imagine the same tone to words as they might have if they were moved to say those words themselves. Those who enjoy a good contest like me and approach it with fierceness but good heart need to take care to try to make our humour and heart show through despite the roughness of the contest. It is a skill that I am gradually developing.
   
I've never consumed gold; you have me wondering.

Yeah, good answer. Heart and head coming together, or rather love and mind together, have a chance of glimpsing these things. Freewill too, and the black and white prime distinction of our intelligence give us potential to comprehend such things, to the extent we are able at any given time. Good point re the limitations of the consciousness and dimension that we exist in. Our brain too, has limitations; but the heart centre can improve that. Like the physical heart nourishes the brain, so the heart centre nourishes the mind, and yet the head directs the heart. It is an interesting symbiotic type relationship they have.

I think my most extensive insights and outsights and most awe inspiring out-of-body experiences have each occurred due to the heart and head centres coming together in harmony and joining their forces.      

cb

  Nope, not aware of Bill Burr, but i think i get the gist.  I would also say that you are somewhat over masculinely-Yang polarized.  If i was part of your guidance, i might say a greater balance or attunement with the Feminine-Yin could be beneficial.  But there are certainly times and circumstances wherein Yang and Fire are very needed and helpful.  Our Teacher showed that on occasion.  He was not a passive, always super gentle personality in his expression with others.  He could and did get quite confrontational and in people's faces, and he oft challenged people.  And let's not get into Yoḥanan (John the Baptist), who was more consistently fiery in expression than the more gentle and balanced Teacher of teachers.

  Yes, gold is an interesting substance.  There was a study done wherein the participants who were given colloidal gold had their IQ scores increased by 20%.   Cayce's guidance talked some about gold and used it in healing, both in the more vibrational-electrical form and also in the more densely physical.  Particularly for cases of MS and alcoholism. 

    Once they said something about if the right kinds and amounts of gold and silver were taken into the human body, it would extend the life by twice as long (implied is if also otherwise healthy and with good attitude). 

   Gold is at a very fast rate of vibration, and is also a strong vibration, and works on the nervous system and resonates with the higher endocrine glandular centers. 

   First time i ingested some high quality colloidal gold, felt mildly high, but in a very clear way, for a bit.  Kelp and some other sea vegetables may be a good source of trace amounts of same. (Cayce's guidance i think said that wild turtle eggs were also a good source of same). 

  Yes, merging of the head and heart, of mind and love, is very important in this process.  More physically it's also connected to the Hemi-sync process of merging left and right brain sides and processes together. 

   I recently started re-reading "Cosmic Journey's" by Rosalind McKnight (one of Bob Monroe's earlier and long time explorer).  You can read it for free on scribd.com    It is one of the most expanded, balanced, and holistic books and works i've yet come across.  I was somewhat friends with the author, Rosie, before she passed, and she was definitely a rather "old (and wise) soul". 


   Speaking of this book, her main guide indicates that the physical level of Earth is not real, and has been temporarily manifested or reflected/refracted off consciousness because of a collective of stuck Souls--it's they who manifested same in getting stuck within. 

  I'm inclined to agree with her guidance, and so i should change my earlier statements about the Co-Creator Being co-creating the physical.   

  The dense physical apparently did not have it's origins in the Co-Creator, but i do think that He/It has been very involved with the manipulation of same on many levels, along with helpers who were never stuck to this degree and who have either helped from outside same or who also have incarnated here to retrieve. 

   I think some of these helpers have even been involved with the genetic modification of human physical bodies in order to increase the light capacity so to speak.   Some of this is done with the Co-Creators pre-knowledge and permission, while He is more indirectly involved with that aspect--He works more on the purely spiritual/inner consciousness aspect.

None of the immediate above is within that book, just my own intuition.  In light of "where" i was for a long time before i incarnated here and what i was doing when i was incarnated here last, it's interesting to note that from age 10 to 13 or so, i was quite obsessed with and had a very strong desire to become a geneticist.

   Anyway's, regarding Rosie's book, since one can read it for free, it's highly, highly recommended.  Talks quite a bit about the process and different levels of "out of body" stuff too.  Unfortunately, one cannot copy and past excerpts from scribd, or at least i don't know how to. 

But here is a link
http://www.scribd.com/doc/56644962/McKnight-Cosmic-Journeys-1999

deleted, will post later; too tired now.

Perhaps you've been eating too much steak and bacon.  :)


1796 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2014 at 8:50am:

deleted, will post later; too tired now.

Funny Albert.
Late at night, lack of sleep and too much hard yakka in the heat is more like it. I started typing then went into tired-typer's-rambling-delirium-syndrome so I thought best to delete and come back another time. I got some smoked pig meat in the pan now. hmmm 

Now where was I with that post? Oh yes, I remember, I was falling off my chair laughing at Justin saying,
"I would also say that you are somewhat over masculinely-Yang polarized.  If i was part of your guidance, i might say a greater balance or attunement with the Feminine-Yin could be beneficial."

he he he hah hah hah haaaaaah ha ha ha oooh ha ha choke he ho ha ha cough pain cough gasp aww ow


Is that an opinion or a preference? 
The difference may be subtle but is definite and potent.
Of course it doesn't matter which it is, as much as it matters that you know which it is.

Or maybe its a misunderstanding? a misappropriation, a muddling, an assumption or mistaken conviction regarding virtues and qualities and their relationship to gender?

Now where was I? mumble mumble hmm oh yes

1. I don't have guidance in the sense the word gets used on “spiritual” forums. I don’t need it; I have conscience. And when conscience goes behind the clouds I have judgement, for better or worst, hopefully for better, and I live and learn with the consequences of that.   

2. Regarding the masculinity comment. I would say the contrary, that the problem with men today, particularly the white male, and more particularly the Australian and English white male, in a few generations has become a pathetic shadow of his former self; is over feminised; seems to have no balls; tries to make a virtue of his cowardice; he unhealthily feigns racial and cultural shame of himself; is scared to show pride in himself and the achievements of his forbears; lives in fear of offending those who bully him into narrow boundaries of how to speak, act and think; has lost his individual initiative; has become a sheep in sheep's clothing; as an individual he seldom comes to the aid of strangers when there is some slight risk to himself, .... I am generalising of course; there are exceptions, and I don’t know much about American males, but overall I am not impressed with the majority of my current fellow white males. When I stop to pick up a tramp or hitchhiker or assist a fellow broken down on the highway I usually find out that dozens sometimes hundreds of able bodied men had previously driven past the fellow and not one stopped to help. Men’s fear is stronger than their goodwill; fear wins nearly every time the two come together in contest. Anyway, I expect it won't last. After this period of men being lost and thinking they are better men by being more like women, then men will find themselves again; their strength, initiative and reason will return, and they will be better men, even better than they were before.

Thanks for the link to Rosalind's book, but I won't read it though because for a couple of decades now I don't read spiritual/astral travel/occult/mystic type books, except the old and new testaments and the dictionary, which I think have the ground covered.

mumble mumble

I do enjoy the mineral kingdom, copper and silver especially, and I must study gold some more. I drink a glass of colloidal silver if I have a saw throat or stomach upset and it usually seems to clear it up. And I too experienced a type of lightness and clarity the first time I drank a glass.   

I have a strong interest in psychometrics, having used them in work, and am not aware of any studies regarding gold and IQ. Perhaps I will locate the study and look at its details, if they reveal them. Many studies don't, or make them hard to access, and so are no more than assertions masquerading as science, and usually as social science.
The subject of IQ has been under attack for some time from sociological idealists trying their hardest to smudge and discredited it and muddy the waters. But as I like to say, the truth will be the last one standing.         

crossbow

ps. "...greater balance or attunement with the Feminine-Yin could be beneficial"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_VVVTmiWFo

crossbow-

I posted a reply in the Off Topic section.

R

At spirit level I'd say it is more accurate to say that we are both male and female. I don't mean this in a body based way.

At the spirit level, the male aspect is beyond being macho.

I used to have a girlfriend who told me about "the young guys." Both her and one of her friends noticed this. There are younger males that are more sensitive than older men tend to be.  These younger males are more alive to their feminine aspect of being. Is sensitivity a bad thing?

My feeling is that Justin isn't afraid to be aware of his feminine aspect of being.

We can limit ourselves in various ways.  In truth we aren't cavemen, we are much more.

If we don't consider the possibilities, how will we grow?

Clearly, our spirit nature is truly beyond being just masculine or feminine.  The contrasts are created by us as part of the separation process, and is necessary. 

Spirit or mind is independent of physiology or biology.   We can, if it suits us, limit our experience to the masculine or feminine.  However it is much like an actor in a play (the play of life).

And do you believe the energy-consciousness within your right hand is the same as the energy-consciousness within your left hand?

Perhaps you believe that in the spirit there is no left or right side, with no left or right consciousness, and no left or right roles. No passive and active roles. No left hand consciousness to secure and stabilise, and no right hand consciousness to apply the detail.  

Perhaps you believe that, like gender, left and right handedness is also a social construct created by us.

Perhaps right handedness is a sign of being afraid to get in touch with your left handedness.

Perhaps lack of ambidextrousness is a sign of lacking spirituality. 

Do you think the overall spirit of life does not have left and right aspects to its energy-consciousness, and does not manifest throughout creation in left and right genders with left and right sides? 

Perhaps you believe that the ancient maxim, As above so below and as within so without, is true in every regard and every aspect of creation, except for gender consciousness. 


But if you dare, imagine this; imagine if male and female gender consciousness, masculinity and femininity, was real and streamed, permeated and manifested throughout all creation. And imagine if each of us, in our souls were created in one gender stream or the other and so our souls are either male or female. Then how lost and foolish would be the souls who fancied that to spiritually elevate themselves they would purpose to be "above gender differences" and be balanced in their maleness and femaleness? How lost and how mistaken would they be? 

Crossbow,

It really just depends how much you identify with the polarized world we live in of opposites and the dualities we all see(light/dark, good/evil, male/female) or whether there is another way to look at things where we are part of a bigger whole yet still ourselves. 

I too see the physical world as it is in terms of opposites.  I am a male and have all the drives of a male animal.  It is a part of my biology.  But if we are explorers, spirit encased in flesh, then is spirit inherently masculine or feminine?  Or, is it more that encasing ourselves in flesh, we voluntarily play the game of the laws of biology and the physical world while we are here?  If, as I deeply believe, the human experience is spirit exploring a false separateness from the whole - as an illusion, then spiritual growth, growing in love of God and all others, eventually leads to the shedding of the outer ego and dualities, with the expression of our inner self (not the nihilistic loss of identity many westerners fear).

A person may hold onto their earthly ego as long as it suits them.  People who have long stays near the earth plane, or in focus 27 as a human likely have the need to maintain their outer earthly identities and persona.  Others may review their lives, and release their attachments to the earth plane, growing in love, never losing their inner uniqueness. 

I don't see anything wrong with the duality of masculine and feminine.  I would never suggest that the sexes must rid themselves of the natural polarization which appears normal and part of the order of things here.  Yet, at the same time, what if love is the only reality in spirit, and masculinity and femininity are only part of  the play acting we go through in being a human animal?  Who knows?


M

   I think a rather big clue to a lot of this is found in Bob Monroe's account.  One time Bob asked his "guidance" (which turned out to be mostly his own "I/there" or "Disk") if he could meet the most mature/developed human living in his space/time reference.  His guidance told him sure, but it might not be what you expect. 

  Boy wasn't it ever. 

  When Bob first comes across this human sitting at a desk, from Bob's more energetic OBE type state, he could not tell if this person was male or female as it was so balanced in general and in one moment felt male and then another felt female.  He just couldn't get a grasp on it.

   Bob immediately labeled this person "He/She" because of this strong impression. 

   Now, going out on a limb, i would say that while this person humorously labeled "He/She" is very balanced/merged between these, they are also slightly more tilted to the masculine/Yang as a whole, but has achieved a balance and synthesis that for most humans is MANY, MANY lifetimes down the road so to speak. 

   Speaking from my own experience in looking at both this life, and at other lives, i've found that as i've grown in Love, i have tended to merge or integrate between the two more. 

  I could still use more of a greater balance while in the physical, as my physical is pretty innately masculine, perhaps beyond average. 

There is gender of both the body and of consciousness and they don't always reflect one another, but one has to deal with the other one in any case. 

  My body well, is let's just say, fairly masculine by nature.  Always have had a lot of testosterone, and also come from a strong Highlander Scottish background with quite reddish beard and all.  Nor am i a stranger to the at times short, fiery temper that comes with super strong Fire energy in a chart (Fire sign Rising with ruler of same in major aspect to Mars Jupiter conjunction, etc). 

   But, as my Consciousness has gained more and more control over the body, this has started to mellow and to shift.   

   I am no "He/She" by any means as of yet, but from my EXPERIENCES i would say that Bob's account is more than accurate and a bigger clue to the nature of Consciousness and the larger growth process. 

   This doesn't mean we leave behind or lose the strengths of the Masculine/Yang side, some of which Crossbow well outlined, but it does mean we do gain the strengths of the Feminine and lose some of the weaknesses of the Masculine/Yang.   

   Both Crossbow and i hold Yeshua as a teacher--the most expanded Teacher to boot. His life and example well showed the above time and time again.  By all accounts this young, radical upstart was generally a gentle man, kind, considerate, etc, and yet he was not adverse at times to letting lose some Fire and being directive, firm, or no nonsense.  Clearly, he was quite in touch with and balanced between the inner Yin-Yang within. 

   Both Yang and Yin has their side of Love.  For the Yang, i would say it's the "tough Love" side. 


   It's perhaps interesting to note that since the very first time reading Bob's account of "He/She" i strongly intuited that He/She was none other than the above Teacher still in the flesh after all these years, with no "recycling" (reincarnating) meanwhile.

  It's interesting to note that Bob went from having very little but disdain for religious Christianity, to showing quite an interest in this "Jesus" character later on down the road.  Bob was a person who generally had beliefs converted by experiences and knowns.. (unusually so for a human, not to mean he didn't occasionally get things off, because he certainly did).

 

cb,


Quote:

But if you dare, imagine this; imagine if male and female gender consciousness, masculinity and femininity, was real and streamed, permeated and manifested throughout all creation.

To me, "mother" Earth is a misconception because the physical manifestation is both masculine and feminine.

With human becomings I think, assume and speculate that the gender of the body is a general (of course not without exceptions) focused intention of the oversoul for the intented gathering of experiences. As I see it a male incarnation undergoing operations to cut off the balls is very free to do so, but it's merely changing the appearance. The DNA/wiring in the body remains the same. The stream to and from the oversoul remains the same, though the oversouls/true selves behind the lace curtain can be considered to be he/shes.

If you're a female incarnation and some of the astrological pillars are masculine placements in the sun, moon and the ascendant, well, another set of contrasts/clarifications. Or a male with key feminine placements. Something to strive for.

What do you consider to be strengths and weaknesses of the male and female genders?

Thank you Matt and Justin for your considered replies. I see you have both made use of areas where we agree, through which to present and exchange ideas upon which we may disagree.
A sign of good communicators.

Good relationships progress along points of agreement, so in our disagreements is does us well to remind each other of our agreements, for doing so prevents alienation.   

Something I expect we agree upon, at least similarly, is the kinship or siblinghood of humanity, in all its races, its limbs and branches, its men and women, are all equally loved by God, and equally accountable under creation's laws of life, and if we are to tune our heart with God's heart then we too must love our fellow men and women and treat them all fairly and accordingly, as how we would be treated if we were them.

Now as for this masculine/feminine thing, I disagree with the western social trend of attributing (directly or by inference) such qualities as sensitivity and caring to females and force and insensitivity to masculinity. There is a misappropriation of qualities to each of the genders. And I see that misappropriation practiced across liberal society and here on this forum board.

I am certain that maleness and femaleness are not limited to the theatre of this planet's stage and the roles we play while here, but are intrinsic throughout creation, from its inception to now and everywhere.  And I am certain that the respective qualities of feminine and masculine are not as commonly named and described by liberal minded westerners. Of course I cannot prove this to anyone.   

Just because a social attitude is currently fashionable and elitist, and just because those who do not subscribe to it are labelled sexists, racists or some other term designed to socially belittle and alienate them and put them on the lowest rung of humanity, does not mean that attitude is right and true. If history is any indicator then nearly every idealist social attitude that comes along and tries to force itself on everyone will simply pass and be seen retrospectively as a fad and as mistaken thinking.

Current western thinking on equality (or on what most currently think of as equality) will pass away, and be looked back upon with ridicule and contempt by a society caught in its next misguided thinking, and so on it goes. Every fashionable period condemning and ridiculing its prior periods, while each time thinking its current period is something true and elite.    
    

By the way,
Regarding the character you mention Justin who Monroe suggested may be the most mature/developed human being living here. Well I wonder if you have noticed the last few verses of John (21:19-24), Jesus' statement to Peter regarding the disciple John remaining here on Earth. He was the quiet disciple, didn't talk much, would sit by the teacher and pay quiet attention, an independent and solitary type. He may have written several books of the new testament. The concepts described in John, 1 john, 2 John and Revelations, cover Christianity from an occult or behind-the-scenes point of view, and those books can certainly seem to be written by the same mind. The books reveal an extraordinary mind with extraordinary comprehension, covering the relationship between God, Christ and creation, the mechanics of the soul and its relationship to God, the nature of the personality and its relationship to soul, an occult (behind the scenes) view of society, social/human patterns and their eventualities, and so much more. He is a most unusual human. Interestingly there is no record of his death.

1796-

I suspect we would disagree on a lot of issues but your statement 'Just because a social attitude is currently fashionable and elitist, and just because those who do not subscribe to it are labelled sexists, racists or some other term designed to socially belittle and alienate them and put them on the lowest rung of humanity, does not mean that attitude is right and true' resonates with me.

I suspect I have many so called liberal values but it always amazes how illiberal and defensive many people become when this liberal consensus is challenged .Its a phenomenon I have remarked on before and I even coined a word for it - presicentricism, which I would define as the belief that the present societal or prevailing norm is somehow the correct or only one. History does indeed show that one set of views are quickly superseded by a different set and become the new orthodoxy and so such a view is short-sighted in my opinion. A healthy society needs a plurality of views and it is apparent that the first thing a dictatorship on gaining power does is shut down any opposing views or free speech. I live in England and it always dismays me when people with so called 'unacceptable' views are banned from speaking here. It is also apparent that such labels as you describe above are used to stifle dissenters in the liberal media. The important thing I think is to remain true to ourselves and not to go along with something because someone else tells us we should.

BTW if not a footy man, how about cricket ? If you are - what do you put Mitchell Johnson's current renaissance down to ?!  ;)

wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 8:28am:

What do you consider to be strengths and weaknesses of the male and female genders?

I don't think there are weaknesses in the pure male and female energies as they are created and stream forth from God.
Any more than there are weaknesses in the left and right hands. 
Male and female are the right and left hands of God.
They are the nature of universal force, split down the middle, from its inception and outflow to all its manifestations, destined to ever seek to come together and work together, each according to the nature of its respective half of the split of universal force. 

Even though the right hand may be stronger by a common measurement than the left hand, that is just one aspect of difference between them, and only if we over value that aspect and do not recognise other qualities, will we consider the left hand to have a weakness.
But the left hand being weaker in that sense than the right hand is one of the left hand's strengths.
For there is much that the right hand cannot do as well, nor as confidently, nor with as much comfort, peace and security in doing it, as can the left hand.
The right hand needs the left hand, and the left hand needs the right.
Try writing with your right hand upon a card without holding the card with your left hand.
Try sawing a piece of timber with your right hand without bracing the timber with your left hand.
The supportive and active roles are equally important.
Which hand pulls back the bow? The left hand or the right? When the bow is flexed there is the left hand on the bow and the right hand on the string. Try pulling back a powerful bow in the wrong hands, with the right bracing the bow and the left pulling the string.
Try unscrewing a tight jar lid, threading a needle, holding a nail and driving it with a hammer.
Sense the innate skills of each hand, one to stabilise, to secure, one to adjust, to move, and together they both to the job.   
With practice one can sense the left and right hand's respective consciousness, senses and their natural abilities and reflexes.
Each hand naturally performs its role better than the other.
But the role of neither hand is less valuable than the other.
They are both equally vital and important.
They are force, split down the middle, from its source to its manifestation.

It is the misuse of the left and right hand's roles, and the mis-valuing of their respective roles, forces, qualities and abilities that make them seem to have weaknesses.
But in fact the left and right hand only have strengths, and only seem to have weaknesses when we don't understand them, or appreciate them, and when we operate them unnaturally. 

In two handed sports and skills, such as boxing, judo, shooting and so on, each hand naturally performs certain roles of the task better than the other.
And a good coach makes sure the players are using their hands in accordance with natural left and right reflexes.

It is possible that the hands can be trained to be ambidextrous and to mix their roles, to a certain point.
Boxers, judo and mixed martial art players, will sometimes train their hands to perform each other's roles, contrary to natural left and right reflexes, so that they can better confuse their opponent by swopping sides.
But being able to do this only works providing the contestant has the initiative over his opponent, or if he is defending himself comfortably.
The moment the opponent gains the initiative to the extent that one falls into uncontrolled defensive reactions then the left and right hands revert reflexively and automatically to their innate reflexive roles.
This can be observed in footage of most cases of severe assaults, and also observed in combative sportsmen when they are under extreme pressure from their opponents so that their trained responses diminish and their innate responses emerge.

You needn't be a martial art practitioner to test the reflex of innateness to override training at a certain point. Anyone can test this reflex their self if they are game. Take something you are trained very well in and feel comfortable performing under pressure, say, spelling your name, saying your address and phone number, reciting your job history, and something action based and simple such as touching your corresponding finger tips together on each hand. Such are so easy tasks that anyone can perform them easily, and with a few minutes practice can perform almost without thinking, and can do so under quite substantial pressure from distractions, such as someone squirting you in the face with cold water or banging a dustbin lid right next to you.

But try doing it when you are being sprayed with pepper spray and with someone slapping hard your face and groin and rubbing your nose painfully around and around your face. Despite your being forewarned and determination to succeed with the exercise, you will likely be unable to spell your name, say you address, phone number or job history, and instead of your fingertips coming together your hands will probably bang together uncoordinatedly or even refuse to do anything but reflexively cover your face and groin or try to push your friend away. And that is while knowing your life is not at risk because you know its an exercise and a friend testing your limits. 

This is why, regardless of gender equality theory, when males and females together are put under pressure to the extent that they each believe they will die and their uncontrolled defensive reflexes take over, then it is natural that they fall into their innate male and female reflexive roles.
Nature overrides feminism. 

Of course there are men and women who are naturally good at the other's roles, as there are right handed and left handed people who perform tasks as well as each other but with different hands.

And although there exists a difference in the skills of the right and left hands, there is also an overlap of skills that are shared by both left and right hands.

There is also a natural exchange and sharing of knowledge, whereby when one hand learns something, to a certain extent the other hand learns it too, without having to directly practice it.

Imagine if the left hands of the world wanted what they thought was equality with right hands and so they formed a left hand liberation movement. That would be a phenomenon.

heisenberg69 wrote on Feb 16^th, 2014 at 5:47am:

1796 - I suspect we would disagree on a lot of issues but your statement ... resonates with me. ...I even coined a word for it - presicentricism, ...  The important thing I think is to remain true to ourselves and not to go along with something because someone else tells us we should. BTW if not a footy man, how about cricket ? If you are - what do you put Mitchell Johnson's current renaissance down to ?!  ;)

Heisenberg,

There is nothing wrong with some hearty disagreements, although it is a good thing to have some agreements too. And it is good that we agree that we disagree on much.  :) (I dislike using smiley faces but I think that old witticism deserves one)

Hmm, an interesting word.

And yes we definitely agree that we should be true to ourselves. Each man his own man, not a sheep-man, think for himself, to use his intelligence, reason and initiative, and follow his conscience - his own highest sense of what is good and right to do by others, and to be himself. We need more men like that, and less men who are like timid dogs. I don't mind if I bore people with it, my push is to encourage in all persons a sense of their own freedom, strength and virtue,  that is genuine responsible accountable free individualism.   

Yes the cricket I follow it with some interest but not with a great passion. hmm Mitchell Johnson, I don't know, perhaps his left handedness contributes to it. There is something about natural left handers in many sporting fields. Once they find themselves and be who they truly are, then they do very well. And of course, depending on the sport, their right handed opponents have to make uncomfortable adjustments.      

Maybe the Mitchell Johnson reference does have some relevance; here you have a man who a year or so ago was a laughing stock, the merciless butt of the 'Barmy' Army's jokes and songs (England's travelling supporters), who could hardly land the ball on the pitch with his career in jeopardy to being the most fearsome fast bowler currently in world cricket today. Maybe he decided not to be a 'sheep man' any longer !

cb, I've got to hand it to you, the logic you wield is very solid, with descriptive and thoughtful hands-on examples. I'd give you a high five too, or shake hands, but nothing wrong with keeping our hands to ourselves and just giving you a appreciative nod - thanks, sure we're different but I truly do like to read about your perspectives. Hand over heart, hehe.

Dominant hand, flawed on their own. Basically. Feminine worry, what a crappity smacking waste of time. Masculine.. nope. Perfection. Even if one of the females in this relatively large crowd reading this, actually dared to speak up, forget about it. Fortunately you already look dashing in your burkas of silence. All of you, uniformly. Spoiling the beauty of a still mouth with words other than "Yes, sir!" would be nothing but a shame. Goading? No, I don't indulge in that nonsense. Have some cake, ladies, and at the very least have some limited motion in your mouths. Yum-yum.

Perhaps a good time to remember what a favorite teacher said, "The meek will inherit the earth" -- and that, no doubt, will be after humanity is gone from it. Nevertheless, this woman is alive today and whether I speak or whether I remain silent, and where I do it -- my choice....and those who do not speak today may speak tomorrow. Wait and see.

Seagull, your choice to have a voice indeed, and there's no need to be afraid to use it though silence can be golden.

Gender conversations is touchy at least partly imo because of identification - I am a male body, I am a female body, and being offended plays right into that. The honest females I talk to tell me they think many males are plain stupid. They also say they aren't afraid of most males but fellow females.

I'll wait and see. In the meantime, do you care to speak about what you think are some good general qualities of females? I'll gladly keep my yap golden on this one and listen if you choose to do so.

1796 wrote on Feb 15^th, 2014 at 9:13am:

By the way, Regarding the character you mention Justin who Monroe suggested may be the most mature/developed human being living here. Well I wonder if you have noticed the last few verses of John (21:19-24), Jesus' statement to Peter regarding the disciple John remaining here on Earth. He was the quiet disciple, didn't talk much, would sit by the teacher and pay quiet attention, an independent and solitary type. He may have written several books of the new testament. The concepts described in John, 1 john, 2 John and Revelations, cover Christianity from an occult or behind-the-scenes point of view, and those books can certainly seem to be written by the same mind. The books reveal an extraordinary mind with extraordinary comprehension, covering the relationship between God, Christ and creation, the mechanics of the soul and its relationship to God, the nature of the personality and its relationship to soul, an occult (behind the scenes) view of society, social/human patterns and their eventualities, and so much more. He is a most unusual human. Interestingly there is no record of his death.

  I've debated whether or not to address the above.  I initially wanted to earlier but held off for some reason.

Yes, i do think John the Beloved was an unusual human being, and my sense has long been that he lived an unusually long time for a human.  I also think that out of all the people around Yeshua besides perhaps his own mother, John the beloved most understood and lived Yeshua's deeper messages. 

  But, my intuition tells me he is not He/She. 

   There are some interesting readings in the Cayce work dealing with this entity John.  John occasionally came through that channel, and i think once was listed as one of the individuals helping in a particular reading.  It was rare for Cayce's guidance to list names, or for beings to come directly through, but both occasionally did happen. 

  What's more interesting is that Cayce's guidance indicated that John the beloved would be reincarnate in America presumably between the 1958 to 1998 period that they oft mentioned as a major world testing period. 

  They said that John would play an important spiritual messenger role, and help to prepare the way for Christ Consciousness to arise in the Earth, and perhaps also for a future liberator that was mentioned in other readings.  The way they talked about it, it sounds like a literal reincarnation, John himself, and not a mixed Disk projection as seems to be more common.

   I cannot say for sure, but i think i may have even met this "John", as i was wondering about a particular individual i had met and for some reasons had thoughts about this in relation to them.  Oddly enough, around that same time (before i mentioned it), they told me out of the blue that their guidance had referred to them as John on a few occasions.  The timing was uncanny and way too coincidental. 

  One time i had a dream wherein i was at a party where Bruce Moen was also at.  Bruce looked intently at me, and said intently, "Go find John, he is more intune* than i."  (*intune, mature, developed, any such word). 

   So if this is true, then i especially don't think that He/She is John the beloved. 

  I do believe this individual has the potential to realize full Christ Consciousness within though. 

I don't know he/she, I never met him. 

I've met plenty of girly-boys though. But they haven't seemed to be spiritual types; usually just self centred, sulky types. 

   
But joking aside,
John is certainly an intriguing character, whoever/whatever he was/is.
He is my favourite New Testament writer. Actually I enjoy all the writers, OT and NT.
Lately I re-read Ecclesiastes and last night I started James as I haven't read that for about 20 years.   

I don't think there has been anything written on how to live that has not been covered by the Greek philosophers and the old and new testaments; everything else seems to be within their bounds, over them perhaps, adding detail, but nothing beyond them in scope. And if one understands that the details are self-found when we understand the foundation, then we don't need any other guidance. Even the eastern Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist teachings are within the scope of the OT and have all their basis laid out there.