Session 23 March 2019

[3DStudent]

Thank you for the session! This one was really thrilling! Between the Intelligent Design studies, the Afterlife thread, and this session, it has been an interesting few weeks. I've had so many insights and am in awe of Creation and the insights I'm learning about. Knowledge with added belief indeed!

Q: (Joe) Why do starlings flock and move in the way they do in apparent instantaneous communication?

A: Love. Flowing and fluid movements are an expression of delight in life.

So maybe we should dance?

Anyway, all I can see at this stage is, that intellectually I have come to the conclusion, that ID is the most appropriate theory of “evolution”, but it seems to me that the ramifications - what that means for life and the universe in general, and for me specifically - has not sunk to a visceral level yet.

Your post did just that for me. Thanks, I had never heard of the Levinthal Paradox. I was reading that at work and got some deep butterfly like feeling in my stomach, like holy smokes, there's gotta be some conscious direction in the folding of proteins with those odds!

For many weeks now, I have set my background to a screenshot of Han Solo when he says, "It's true, all of it" (in reference to The Force, Jedi, etc.) in The Force Awakens. And fittingly, because learning seems to have grown exponentially recently.

 

[Deleted member 11729]

thank you!

 

[JeanneT]

I think Ra material was very useful to me.

I agree, Mandrake. The Ra material was one major turning point for me, as early as 1987, despite the difficult wording and need to read it over and over hoping to get even a tiny piece of the concepts they introduced. However, there was a soul recognition, a vibration or a knowing that strongly attracted me and I stuck to it. The treasure within the material for me was mainly the teaching of STO/STS which was the missing link and changed my life thereafter. Why? I was trained to be like Carla Rueckert...to rise above, embracing and practicing the Buddhist concept that ALL beings have basic goodness, etc., etc. and basically remaining naive in my illusion that love conquers all. And yet, life showed me that there is clearly a darkness and evil in the world, that for me, has never been resolved by "loving" it into goodness.
I was so connected to the Ra material, that while passing through Kentucky in 1997, my husband and I visited Carla and Jim in their home for a weekly gathering and channeling session. Carla was indeed a loving person with a big heart. She almost wore her heart on her sleeve to the point where she seemed to be too "open" and possibly vulnerable to attack. When channeling, Carla had to hold the hand of someone near to ground her for protection. She also was extremely compromised physically yet held a positive attitude...she presented with light, love, forgiveness and positive thinking to the extent of appearing a bit "flaky" (which is not meant as a criticism but just an observation).
I was hoping the gathering would include the study and discussion of some of the Ra material. However, Carla channeled a group of entities she had been working with for years. The channeling itself was not memorable to me in that it seemed fairly mundane and clearly not anything resembling the Ra contact. In retrospect, all was sweet and loving and felt nice but perhaps not more than what she would be saying in conversation, in my opinion. I feel grateful to have met them and hold the experience close to my heart as very special. I see them all as true warriors who sacrificed and continued on despite the challenges which resulted in the downloading some of the most incredible material for us to have privilege to examine. The Ra material is one of the main sources, along with the C's, who followed, that has given me some soul changing pieces of the puzzle to some truth. For me, it has worked like this...discovery of one thing that builds on another and another while having to examine each and throw some out or put aside as the search continues. However, I have witnessed a real speeding up as it seems that once the forum got going (and I apologize for being shy with participation yet reading a lot), even more dots are connecting through the C's, the books and the discussions that follow. Maybe each is one step on the ladder and though, not 100% perfect while coming through a channel, part of a very beautiful mosaic that I/we have to strive to put together to really see all the intricate threads and colors that make the pattern .

 

[Mandatory Intellectomy]

But to what extent was the progress of all the species on Earth directly created?

A: As Behe suggests, at the family level.

Q: (L) Like family Canis. You can get wolves, dogs, etc.

I looked this up to see how it really works. Turns out Canis is a genus and the family is Canidae, which includes mainly genuses Vulpini and Canini. Vulpini are foxes (and a racoon dog); Canini include dogs, wolves, jackals, and also some foxes.

So would that mean that a "prototype" for all these was created, and dogs, wolves and foxes are Darwinian mutations of this prototype?

Also, in the family Hominidae, there are humans, gorillas, orangutans, and chimpanzees. So by the same logic, humans and gorillas would be different mutants of the same original species.

Is this what the Cs were saying, or am I getting it wrong?

 

[Ocean]

I looked this up to see how it really works. Turns out Canis is a genus and the family is Canidae, which includes mainly genuses Vulpini and Canini. Vulpini are foxes (and a racoon dog); Canini include dogs, wolves, jackals, and also some foxes.

So would that mean that a "prototype" for all these was created, and dogs, wolves and foxes are Darwinian mutations of this prototype?

Also, in the family Hominidae, there are humans, gorillas, orangutans, and chimpanzees. So by the same logic, humans and gorillas would be different mutants of the same original species.

Is this what the Cs were saying, or am I getting it wrong?

Quote from the session.

(Joe) No, but is that... So there is an evolutionary process where the component parts of a dog...

(L) I don't think they were talking about the dog.

(Joe) So some evolution happens naturally? Ya know what I mean?

(Pierre) I think what Joe means is that... Joe is reconciling intelligent design and evolution somehow by saying that yes, at our level...

(L) There is no evolution.

-----------------------------------------------------------
So no, I don't think Darwin had anything to do with it.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

I looked this up to see how it really works. Turns out Canis is a genus and the family is Canidae, which includes mainly genuses Vulpini and Canini. Vulpini are foxes (and a racoon dog); Canini include dogs, wolves, jackals, and also some foxes.

So would that mean that a "prototype" for all these was created, and dogs, wolves and foxes are Darwinian mutations of this prototype?

Seems to me that's what the Cs and Behe are saying. Behe is just presenting it as his best informed conclusion based on the current research, though. And he seems generally supportive of the suggestion that the species designation should be abandoned. It's arguable that most species are just expressions of the variation already inherent at the genus level. In other words, each species of a particular genus just has different genes turned on or off, different genes that suffered degradation at some point, etc. But there's probably a lot more research to do at the family and genus levels, I think. And we still have to account for species-specific orphan genes, too. Maybe those are just 'tweaks' as opposed to full blown 'direct creations', though.

Also, in the family Hominidae, there are humans, gorillas, orangutans, and chimpanzees. So by the same logic, humans and gorillas would be different mutants of the same original species.

Is this what the Cs were saying, or am I getting it wrong?

I think with humans there was more going on than just the accidental evolution of a new 'species'. Behe says something similar in his new book.

 

[goyacobol]

So no, I don't think Darwin had anything to do with it.

After reading Behe's Darwins Black Box (I'm 57% into it now) it looks more like "devolution" within" families rather that "evolution" whether it occurs naturally or by human manipulative breeding of dogs, cattle or other examples such as GMO plants.

different genes that suffered degradation at some point, etc. But there's probably a lot more research to do at the family and genus levels, I think. And we still have to account for species-specific orphan genes, too. Maybe those are just 'tweaks' as opposed to full blown 'direct creations', though.

It seems that people are now so used to hearing the term "evolution" that it is stamped into consciousness as an explanation for any variations within species/genus/family/etc..

I think there is a kind of "evolution" but it may be more of a cosmic design that changes depending on the success or failure of previous designs that can only be "tweaked" so much before they become unsuitable or unacceptable within the overall design of the cosmos.

Session 14 June 2014:

(Chu) I have a question. Linked to the beginning of the session... Starting with dinosaurs, if humans can bring so many disasters to themselves like the Roman civilization, how come there were cometary impacts in the past? So, my theory is there's gotta be something else. Either these things are gonna happen no matter what and people get crazy and start acting in all these weird ways because they sense that something is coming, or/and possibly combined with...

A: You are an experiment! It was necessary for evolutionary progress to proceed, so the dinosaurs had to go!

Q: (Pierre) That's what you wrote in your book. You wrote the dinosaurs were swept away because evolutionarily speaking, they didn't go the right way. Then there is a natural reaction that favors the "right" evolution...

(L) And it's still a natural reaction. We're not that much different from the dinosaurs.

(Chu) So we're bringing it onto ourselves because...

(L) We're part of the living system, and...

(Perceval) But it's not natural in the sense that... Because the first four words are, "You are an experiment!" So, did someone wipe the dinosaurs away so that they could seed the planet with monkeys that could turn into humans?

A: Partly, yes.

Q: (Perceval) They helped it along.

(L) Yeah.

(Chu) So because we're failing, it attracts the event, either bigger event or whatever... That wouldn't happen if the experiment was going right, basically?

A: It would be much ameliorated.

 

[Mandatory Intellectomy]

I think with humans there was more going on than just the accidental evolution of a new 'species'. Behe says something similar in his new book.

Well, given that humans are the only 3D out of them all, I guess there would have to be something more going on in this case.

Still, I wonder if Darwinism can actually account for the difference between a wolf and a fox. Not that I know much about the actual extent of the differences. If it's just genes turned on or off, then sure. In which case, I guess, it would mean the design was pretty versatile in the first place.

 

[Mandatory Intellectomy]

It seems that people are now so used to hearing the term "evolution" that it is stamped into consciousness as an explanation for any variations within species/genus/family/etc..

People apparently use it without thinking. (Or in some cases, it's propaganda, maybe.) As Behe shows in the new book, people routinely insert it into sentences where it doesn't really belong. Instead of saying "this animal has this", they say "this animal has evolved this", even though there's zero evidence that any evolution of that kind had ever happened.

I'm reading a book called "Why Buddhism Is True", and as I pay more attention to any Darwinist remarks, thanks to reading Behe recently, I feel like the guy who wrote it is more of a Darwinist than a Buddhist. He constantly uses the words "natural selection has designed" (among many other Darwinist references) and applies it to all kinds of things including human emotions. Just using natural selection and design in the same breath is quite contradictory. He probably never gave it much thought and just thinks Darwinism must be true because everyone around him seems to think so. But once you read Behe and start paying attention to these things, it all looks pretty silly.

 

[agirl]

Mind blowing session!Thank you all

 

[Bluegazer]

Perhaps, what we understand by evolution is more related to the soul, that is, consciousness. The body only adapts to the new pattern / information. How much "time" does the development of a soul take until its complete individualization?

It would seem that only when the conscience when its perception is extended by the experience and the lessons, there is an evolutionary way. Seen that way if an individual chooses the STO path, that is an evolutionary route. And the STS another evolutionary route.

 

[goyacobol]

How much "time" does the development of a soul take until its complete individualization?

From a fallen/scattered/fragmented state point of view maybe we are more like soul fragments of a group soul. Maybe we are "individualized" enough already.

"Time" is an illusion at least from our perspective in 3D.

The Cs had some interesting things to say about the group souls concept in this session:

Session 14 June 1997:

Q: (Laura) Okay, hold everything, earlier C*** and I were talking on the phone about mythological figures possibly representing group souls. That is, on our level of 3rd density, groups of individuals who are separated by flesh, might be extensions of group souls at a higher level...

A: Who does Zeus represent?

Q: (Laura) Zeus. (Frank) The father of the gods?

A: And the implication is...?

Q: (Laura) Who are the gods that he is the father is... (Frank) C*** is glad that you are in the hot seat... (Laura) Implications? That is too much for me right now!

A: No.

Q: (Laura) Yes it is! It requires thinking! The implication of Zeus representing... does Zeus represent 7th density?

A: Or does Zeus represent the grasping for 7th density?

Q: (Laura) Are we saying grasping in ways that are not suitable?

A: No grasping is "not suitable."

Q: (Laura) Okay. Are we all pieces of ... are there groups and groups and groups that are pieces of a larger whole, or larger wholes, and they can only graduate when they assemble?

A: More to the point would be that that makes the progress speed up for most of those involved in such a process.

Q: (Laura) Is it necessary to interact with other souls that are resonating...

A: Laura, give C*** a chance to absorb and respond with her two cents. After all, it is her "nickel."

Q: (C***) Are Laura and I part of a group soul or group entity?

A: What do you think?

Q: (C***) Yes.

A: And...

Q: (C***) I think that we are part of a group soul... whatever that means, we have a purpose; I think we have a similar interest, and that is to discover the truth. And it is also to advance ourselves.

A: And...

Q: (C***) When one group advances, then it filters down to others...

A: How does it "filter down?"

Q: (C***) Because I believe that all are connected.

A: How so?

Q: (Laura) I get it! The Zeus thing. The whole Zeus thing, the bearing of children, the moving out in all these various ways, manifestations or patterns as defined by the 'children' through all the various levels, so that it eventually all comes back around to 7th density.

A: And what does it mean when it "comes back around?"

Q: (Laura) Union with the One. And it all just keeps going around and around.

A: And C*** says...

Q: (C***) You mean, what happens when we all get back to 7th density?

A: We mean what do you think?

Q: (C***) If we are patterned after the myths of Zeus, and we have gone forth, and there are lots of scatterings of fragments upon the earth having many experiences, and as we grow and advance, we come to the truth and the full meaning, we merge back together again with all of the wisdom of all of these experiences.

A: Yes, but is not just the "Earth."

Q: (C***) That's why I say we go into another level...

A: But, C***, what of those not on the Earth?

Q: (C***) They are in the same process.

A: Yes.

Q: (C***) Do they have different myths?

A: They have different everything... But, in the final analysis, it is really just the same!

 

[Bluegazer]

From a fallen/scattered/fragmented state point of view maybe we are more like soul fragments of a group soul. Maybe we are "individualized" enough already.

"Time" is an illusion at least from our perspective in 3D.

The Cs had some interesting things to say about the group souls concept in this session:

Session 14 June 1997:

As you mention, the group. Surely other groups have another type of development.

Also remember, that in the transcriptions it is mentioned how some souls of the fauna go from 2D to 3D to occupy human bodies and go through the entire cycle of experience until reaching a certain point. Maybe like the one we're in now.

Also the mention to the long wave cycle - subtle, ethereal - and to the short wave cycle - physical / ethereal -

One thing, look carefully that whenever I mention in a post the word "time" is almost always placed between "".

Mmm ... I have other ideas coming, but I can not put order for now.

But it seems to me that the STO / STS paradigms are the true evolutionary paths.

When we see the different natures of the chemical compounds, and the nature of some plants and animals very deep down, we can feel this the root of their essence, one of the aspects or faces of God.

There has been talk in other topics about it.

But think about this: There are proteins that as antennas will have a direction of consciousness and vice versa.

When the "time" comes, when the conscience can make a choice, it will answer the call of its internal nature or not.

In that sense, the body does not evolve. It only responds and changes when there is a paradigm shift or there is not.

Either you go in the direction of order, or you go to the direction of entropy.

 

[goyacobol]

Also remember, that in the transcriptions it is mentioned how some souls of the fauna go from 2D to 3D to occupy human bodies and go through the entire cycle of experience until reaching a certain point. Maybe like the one we're in now.

I don't know if a rock, animal or plant can be STO or STS but there may be something at that level of awareness I suppose (Cs say even computers can develop soul imprint). Since your question mentioned "individualization" of a soul my answer was addressing that concept in relation to 3D.

When we see the different natures of the chemical compounds, and the nature of some plants and animals very deep down, we can feel this the root of their essence, one of the aspects or faces of God.

As for the "root of their essence" the Cs do distinguish between souled and non-souled beings describing Organic Portals as being similar to plants and animals.

Session July 13 2002:

Q: (L) I guess that means that the life force energy that is embodied in Organic Portals is something like the soul pool that is theorized to exist for flora and fauna. This would, of course, explain the striking and inexplicable similarity of psychopaths, that is so well defined that they only differ from one another in the way that different species of trees are different in the overall class of Tree-ness. So, if they don't have souls, where does the energy come from that recharges Organic Portals?

A: The pool you have described.

Q: Does the recharging of the souled being come from a similar pool, only maybe the "human" pool?

A: No - it recharges from the so-called sexual center which is a higher center of creative energy. During sleep, the emotional center, not being blocked by the lower intellectual center and the moving center, transduces the energy from the sexual center. It is also the time during which the higher emotional and intellectual centers can rest from the "drain" of the lower centers' interaction with those pesky organic portals so much loved by the lower centers. This respite alone is sufficient to make a difference. But, more than that, the energy of the sexual center is also more available to the other higher centers.

Being 3D we are hopefully able to choose using freewill to travel one path or the other (STS or STO).

We seem to be in a short cycle which is nearing it's completion.

Mmm ... I have other ideas coming, but I can not put order for now.

Sounds good. Keep us posted.

 

[lightinthedistance]

There's obviously a real problem with us trying to figure these things out using our time-limited brains. Being stuck in time-frame reference and trying to understand 'time does not exist', and 'you are being created right now, ready to be planted on ancient earth' and 'the planet you are from already burned to a cinder, but it also hasn't yet' and 'everything is an illusion' will require a very different way of conceiving of the answers to these questions. A central part of that, it seems to me, is to get your head around there being no time, everything happening 'right now' and everything happening in a repeating cycle with no start and no end.

A philosophical musings about time...

All things begin and end in eternity. As "eternity" means there is no time, the logic of the previous sentence must mean all things begin and end in a place with no time. If we take the explicit meaning of "no time" ie. eternity, then all things does not have a beginning and an end. If things doesn't have a beginning and an end, then everything is repeating in a cycle. If everything is happening in a repeating cycle then there is nothing that anyone could change when we are 'caught' in the cycle. We are born into a cycle not of our choosing, or at least if it's a choice made by us on/from a higher level, we are not at the liberty to change anything at this level.

If we can't change anything and time does not exist, each moment of 'time' that we lived in this place could be the most important moment as the future or past doesn't exist. The past is just a memory stored somewhere we do not really know while the future is a potential uncertainty that hasn't been written in stone. Only that uncertainty is for the individual and not the group for the fate of the collective has been decided by a higher power?

Maybe that is what we have to learn in this life? People chased after material well-being thinking it will satisfy the void inside and only after they have lost their loved ones do they realized they're chasing after an illusion.

Maybe the illusion we have is the mistaken belief that everything in this world is divided, finite and changing? We see outside of ourselves the undivided in the divided, the infinite in the finite and the unchanging in the changing thinking that is reality. It is only within that we caught a glimpse of the undivided, infinite, and changeless mind of God, manifested in nature in the physical laws of gravity, electricity and momentum, perhaps?

Back to the question of 'time'. What exactly is 'time' besides it being an illusion and that it does not exist? i have known the question for a long time but do not have any answers at all.

Last but not least, thanks for sharing another session. i never expressed my gratitude enough for what i'd learned here often enough :)