+- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Bring4th Community (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=16)
+--- Forum: Olio (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: The End (/showthread.php?tid=3473)
The End - Tenet Nosce - 10-28-2011
http://montalk.net/gnosis/220/9-the-end
RE: The End - unity100 - 10-28-2011
Quote:In the next thousand years, mankind will witness the conclusion of a timewar that may have started in the future and spanned back in time to when the Nordic meta-civilization destroyed their planet approximately 70,000-80,000 years ago.
!!?!?!?
RE: The End - Conifer16 - 10-28-2011
Same reaction. ??!?? Why have you posted this tenet?
RE: The End - Tenet Nosce - 10-28-2011
The posting of a link to an article is not necessarily an endorsement of the entire body of information contained therein. I am primarily posting it due to the timing of its release, and secondarily for the content. It is intended for others to read and discern the truth (or lack thereof) for themselves. Feel free to comment as you feel appropriate. It is simply another viewpoint.
Quote:In the next thousand years, mankind will witness the conclusion of a timewar that may have started in the future and spanned back in time to when the Nordic meta-civilization destroyed their planet approximately 70,000-80,000 years ago.In reference to this, I believe the author was referring to the destruction of Maldek. But I may be mistaken.
RE: The End - unity100 - 10-28-2011
destruction of maldek happened 750,000 years ago. mars was obliterated 75,000 years ago.
the info seems rather unreliable for its release to be of significance.
RE: The End - Tenet Nosce - 10-28-2011
(10-28-2011, 09:17 PM)unity100 Wrote: destruction of maldek happened 750,000 years ago. mars was obliterated 75,000 years ago.Sorry I had the time frames transposed in my mind (that seems to be happening with greater frequency). I meant to say I think he was referring to the destruction of civilization on Mars.
the info seems rather unreliable for its release to be of significance.
RE: The End - Conifer16 - 10-28-2011
(10-28-2011, 09:17 PM)unity100 Wrote: destruction of maldek happened 750,000 years ago. mars was obliterated 75,000 years ago.mars wasn't obliterated. it lost its capability to sustain life.
the info seems rather unreliable for its release to be of significance.
RE: The End - unity100 - 10-28-2011
it says in that text that they destroyed their planet 75,000 years ago.
RE: The End - Conifer16 - 10-28-2011
so were you quoting the link?
RE: The End - 3DMonkey - 10-28-2011
deja vu
RE: The End - apeiron - 10-28-2011
Looks like science fiction.
{..............}
(Scene: The Bridge)
Kirk: Mr. Sulu, set course for the planet Luxuria.
Sulu: Yes, sir!
(Suddenly, the ship is rocked by a violent explosion which causes everyone
to fall out of their chairs.)
Kirk: Mr. Chekov, report on all Klingon ships in the area.
Chekov: Negative, keptin. Sensors show no enemy wessel in sight.
Kirk: Your analysis, Mr. Spock.
Spock: I assure you, Captain, I am not operating under the influence of
illicit mind-altering substances. However, if you think it necessary,
regulations do stipulate that--
Kirk: I meant your analysis of the current situation.
Spock: My apologies, Captain. I am still sometimes unable to compensate for
the vagaries of human enunciation. It would appear, Captain, that a visional
catalyst source has malfunctioned to the critical overload stage. (Noticing
Kirk's blank stare, he shakes his head almost imperceptably.) To rephrase
my statement into what I believe you humans call `the vernacular': a light
bulb blew in Engineering.
{.......}
RE: The End - Ens Entium - 10-29-2011
I actually like Tom's (author) articles. I've been following the Gnosis series of articles and I think many here would enjoy the seventh article. Personally, I liked the eighth, on polar mythology- he managed to get to the core of the matter in a revealing way, cutting through morass of prevailing thought. It was educational for me. The other reason I found it enjoyable was that it allows one to play the game of corresponding much of the content of 'directed' mythology to the archetypes on a beyond-individual scale.
Also, his ideas on physics are great, again his ability to sort the wheat from the chaff is exceptional and understanding is always gained. He has a multitude of other topics which he addresses with a refreshing clarity and intelligence.
Lastly, one question that comes up here is, does it serve one to approach a source of information with the intent of seeing if it stands up to attack? What happened to the spirit of seeking truth, wherever one may find it? I have gained understanding and perspective from his info, just as I do from people here on this forum. I don't see how he is different in that respect.
Thank you Tenet.
RE: The End - Tenet Nosce - 10-29-2011
(10-29-2011, 04:20 AM)Ens Entium Wrote: Lastly, one question that comes up here is, does it serve one to approach a source of information with the intent of seeing if it stands up to attack? What happened to the spirit of seeking truth, wherever one may find it? I have gained understanding and perspective from his info, just as I do from people here on this forum. I don't see how he is different in that respect.
Thank you Tenet.
You are welcome, and thanks for sharing your observations.
42.2 Wrote:Questioner: I will attempt to make an analogy. If an animal, shall I say, a bull, in a pen attacks you because you have wandered into his pen, you get out of his way rapidly but you do not blame him. You do not have much of an emotional response other than the response that he might damage you. However, if you encounter another self in his territory and he attacks you, your response may be more of an emotional nature creating physical bodily responses. Am I correct in assuming that when your response to the animal and to the other-self is that of seeing both as Creator and loving both and understanding their action in attacking you is the action of their free will then you have balanced yourself correctly in this area? Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is basically correct. However, the balanced entity will see in the seeming attack of an other-self the causes of this action which are, in most cases, of a more complex nature than the cause of the attack of the second-density bull as was your example. Thus this balanced entity would be open to many more opportunities for service to a third-density other-self.
42.3 Questioner: Would a perfectly balanced entity feel any emotional response in being attacked by the other-self?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. The response is love.
42.4 Questioner: In the illusion that we now experience it is difficult to maintain this response especially if the attack results in physical pain, but I assume that this response should be maintained even through physical pain or loss of life. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct and further is of a major or principle importance in understanding, shall we say, the principle of balance. Balance is not indifference but rather the observer not blinded by any feelings of separation but rather fully imbued with love.