|
|
Post by paul on Jan 13, 2016 7:22:27 GMT 9.5
It is common that some people identify themselves primarily by their calling: policeman, paratrooper, nurse etc.
Some may see their highest endeavor as adhering to particular religions. Others may see relationship to an asset as their primary identifier e.g. a farmer or a landlord.
So, what do you hold to be your primary identity?
|
|
|
|
Post by pointwithinacircle on Jan 13, 2016 14:09:09 GMT 9.5
Human. Not that I haven't used all the other qualifiers at one time or another, I just choose to choose human at this time. I have gradually come to the belief that it is the best description of the reality of who I am. It is one of the few descriptions that I am unlikely to be wrong about.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 13, 2016 17:00:59 GMT 9.5
>It is one of the few descriptions that I am unlikely to be wrong about.
Sometimes I use the term "Earth human" to be more precise, since many groups consider they are descended from Star people.
In Egypt the Widow was thought to be from Sirius - the brightest (blazing) star in the sky. Would you consider the sons of the Widow to be Earth humans?
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 14, 2016 9:58:41 GMT 9.5
Energy Having a humanoid like experience .. I tend to think of energy as a vehicle for an intelligence |
|
|
|
Post by fjrogers on Jan 14, 2016 12:41:19 GMT 9.5
With a strong inner focus, I think of my personal identification as that of an aspirant on the path to attainment and the grail. This is a quest I have sought since my very early years.
|
|
|
|
Post by pointwithinacircle on Jan 14, 2016 14:05:51 GMT 9.5
Yeah, uh-huh, maybe, ok. I would love to be stardust and energy. But right now my job is to do my best to become human that I can become. Focusing on all that other stuff just gets in the way of my doing the single job that this earth human actually has before him. Right now being the best human I can be is more important than being stardust and energy (for this human being).
|
|
|
|
Post by fjrogers on Jan 15, 2016 13:15:42 GMT 9.5
Energy is a vehicle for an intelligence. Everything is light condensed to form what we call matter. That light is the limitless universal intelligence.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 15, 2016 17:40:27 GMT 9.5
>That light is the limitless universal intelligence.
Did the Light emit itself?
|
|
|
|
Post by fjrogers on Jan 16, 2016 13:27:36 GMT 9.5
That light has always been but it's had many guises and forms.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 16, 2016 13:39:08 GMT 9.5
>That light has always been but it's had many guises and forms.
Is Light emitted from some Source?
If so is the Source the primary intelligence?
|
|
|
|
Post by fjrogers on Jan 17, 2016 12:42:15 GMT 9.5
The light comes from the primary universal intelligence which is the unified source.
|
|
|
|
Post by fjrogers on Feb 3, 2016 9:38:19 GMT 9.5
Ultimately there is only one Light, one intelligence and one being.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 3, 2016 12:05:16 GMT 9.5
So is there only one light in this universe?
If not, can we choose with which light we identify?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2016 20:39:50 GMT 9.5
> If not, can we choose with which light we identify?
There seems to be a choice of lights to emit. My limited understanding is that choice is by identity to one of two groups, a property of the being, perhaps an alignment. At least the lights are distinct at this level, I imagine that from higher perspective the lights are as One, but that is just speculation on my part.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 4, 2016 9:01:47 GMT 9.5
There seems to be a choice of lights to emit... Quite a wide choice it seems and the choice widens as we approach other star systems. In the alien documentation, a key question is: what color light do you see in your home system? It is not entirely clear that the question refers to physical light as many of the entities do not have high density bodies. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2016 15:05:03 GMT 9.5
> Quite a wide choice
Yes, a spectrum. Do you see it as continuous or in some way a discrete spectrum?
> choice widens as we approach other star systems.
It would make sense that a star system be suitable for the inhabitants' developmental phase.
> It is not entirely clear that the question refers to physical light as many of the entities do not have high density bodies.
> My limited understanding is that choice is by identity to one of two groups
I was trying to make sense of some information I received, and dividing the light into two groups seemed implied or was at least assumed by me, but I had not followed up on it.
My assumption was of something I am inclined to refer to as 'dark light'. I wondered if it might be what scientists refer to as 'dark energy' or 'dark flow', invisible to our scientific equipment currently.
If there is some property of a 'dark light' which is fundamentally different, then two types of light might be accurate in some sense.
Alternatively, I wonder if that might be a suitable term for light that is just not visible to the viewer, and then simply all light might just be classified by an observer as that which is currently viewable and that which is not and might be called 'dark'. This being applicable to all energy bodies the viewer has use of.
It may well be though, that the beings I saw as other than me were simply emitting a significantly different frequency to me but on the same spectrum and my distinction of the two groups was no more than that.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 4, 2016 19:28:27 GMT 9.5
>Do you see it as continuous or in some way a discrete spectrum? I rather see it as the lights emanating from particular intelligences - so I doubt there is a continuous spectrum. >It would make sense that a star system be suitable for the inhabitants' developmental phase. It is not clear to me that it is practical to take an entity to just any other star system. I would not be surprised if there were compatibility problems. >If there is some property of a 'dark light' which is fundamentally different There is certainly light that is too high frequency to see - possibly as indicated by the colors for 30th degree regalia where the light only becomes visible at the edge where the frequency drops - but that is not fundamentally different. There are also forms of light with which humans do not usually interact. I referred to an example on another thread: "The Brethren of the Shadowed Light were back again this morning. It seems that I did not quite understand their roles. So now they are working and I can see that they are making the dark energies more orderly.....At least some of the orderliness in the dark structure turns out to be karma - nicely packaged for treatment." a406.proboards.com/thread/1272/brethren-shadowed-light |
|
|
|
Post by fjrogers on Mar 4, 2016 14:54:26 GMT 9.5
> There is certainly light that is too high frequency to see - possibly as indicated by the colors for 30th degree regalia where the light only becomes visible at the edge where the frequency drops - but that is not fundamentally different.
That is rather interesting. I know the 30th degree regalia does indicate something along those lines.
|
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Apr 1, 2016 11:01:21 GMT 9.5
Human. Not that I haven't used all the other qualifiers at one time or another, I just choose to choose human at this time. I have gradually come to the belief that it is the best description of the reality of who I am. It is one of the few descriptions that I am unlikely to be wrong about. What a fun thread Paul! Sorry I'm so late on it, works been a nightmare. I agree with pointwithinacircle though. its just easier this way, and on way too many levels HAHA |
|
|
|
Post by fjrogers on Apr 2, 2016 12:23:56 GMT 9.5
Human, would be a logical identification for us to convey to the world. I do believe that some people have qualities that are above or below human.
|
|
