Bring4th Forums
  • Login Register
    Login
    Username:
    Password:
  • Archive Home
  • Members
  • Team
  • Help
  • More
    • About Us
    • Library
    • L/L Research Store
User Links
  • Login Register
    Login
    Username:
    Password:

    Menu Home Today At a Glance Members CSC & Team Help
    Also visit... About Us Library Blog L/L Research Store Adept Biorhythms

    As of Friday, August 5th, 2022, the Bring4th forums on this page have been converted to a permanent read-only archive. If you would like to continue your journey with Bring4th, the new forums are now at https://discourse.bring4th.org.

    You are invited to enjoy many years worth of forum messages brought forth by our community of seekers. The site search feature remains available to discover topics of interest. (July 22, 2022) x

    Bring4th Bring4th Studies Strictly Law of One Material errors in transmission

    Thread: errors in transmission


    Plenum (Offline)

    ...
    Posts: 6,188
    Threads: 1,013
    Joined: Dec 2011
    #1
    08-06-2012, 10:02 AM
    Shin'Ar makes a good point in another thread:

    (08-06-2012, 09:26 AM)ShinAr Wrote: It would be wise of all LOO students to remember this and to diligently seek for inaccuracies as they study to make sure they are not misled by mistake. Mistakes that could be made in the transmission or the receiving ends of that sharing of fields.

    I will say that what I have picked up on is that Ra has, on occasion, used the term Intelligent Infinity when they meant to use Intelligent Energy.

    namely that Ra has had difficulties with our language/concepts/numbers. There are numerous cases of numbering mistakes that are on the record. A lot of these center around referring to yellow ray instead of green (Ra counts the inner rays from red upwards instead of from 1 up). There is also a case of referring to STO as STS (a dipole mistake/mis-assignment) and an example of an archetype naming mistake.

    these are understandable; everyone has experienced the case of speaking to someone, and having a conversation flow, and then they interrupt you, and say, hey did you mean to say this instead of that?? and it astonishes you that you mis-used a word, when the meaning was so clear in your mind. Really funny when it happens in a national sports broadcast Smile

    Don was vigilant when listening to Ra's answers, and seemed to catch the most glaring, obvious errors.

    and yet, we shouldn't become slavish to the text (guilty here!) but rather try to penetrate the meaning/concepts being conveyed by the language.

    that will involve individual interpretation.
    [+] The following 3 members thanked thanked Plenum for this post:3 members thanked Plenum for this post
      • βαθμιαίος, Conifer16, Aaron
    Spaced (Offline)

    Dark Star
    Posts: 2,702
    Threads: 61
    Joined: Jul 2012
    #2
    08-06-2012, 10:12 AM
    Ra also mentions that they have difficulty with numbers and dates in 3rd Density and any dates for past events given by Ra might be inaccurate.
    [+] The following 1 member thanked thanked Spaced for this post:1 member thanked Spaced for this post
      • Plenum
    zenmaster (Offline)

    Member
    Posts: 5,541
    Threads: 132
    Joined: Jan 2009
    #3
    08-06-2012, 04:31 PM
    But have there ever been any cases where channeling involving dates has been accurate? I am wondering why this is such a big surprise.
    [+] The following 2 members thanked thanked zenmaster for this post:2 members thanked zenmaster for this post
      • Ruth, neutral333
    Spaced (Offline)

    Dark Star
    Posts: 2,702
    Threads: 61
    Joined: Jul 2012
    #4
    08-06-2012, 05:02 PM
    True enough zenmaster, and any information about specific dates is somewhat transient by nature anyhow. What's important is that concepts come through just fine.

      •
    Bring4th_Austin (Offline)

    Moderator
    Posts: 2,784
    Threads: 212
    Joined: Dec 2010
    #5
    08-06-2012, 05:29 PM (This post was last modified: 08-06-2012, 05:44 PM by Bring4th_Austin.)
    I think one of the more curious communication kerfuffles in the material is Ra's use of the word "galaxy." Why would Ra have a different definition for an English word with its origins being directly related to the Milky Way Galaxy?

    And this wasn't just a mistake in communication...Ra specifically said that they consider our local star system to be a galaxy. Why?
    _____________________________
    The only frontier that has ever existed is the self.
    [+] The following 1 member thanked thanked Bring4th_Austin for this post:1 member thanked Bring4th_Austin for this post
      • Patrick
    Patrick (Offline)

    YAY - Yet Another You
    Posts: 5,635
    Threads: 64
    Joined: Mar 2012
    #6
    08-06-2012, 06:17 PM (This post was last modified: 08-06-2012, 06:20 PM by Patrick.)
    But "There are no mistakes under the Law of One" ~ Ra 12.24 Wink



    (08-06-2012, 05:29 PM)Bring4th_Austin Wrote: I think one of the more curious communication kerfuffles in the material is Ra's use of the word "galaxy." Why would Ra have a different definition for an English word with its origins being directly related to the Milky Way Galaxy?

    And this wasn't just a mistake in communication...Ra specifically said that they consider our local star system to be a galaxy. Why?

    Why indeed. Maybe there is a lot more to our "star system" than meets the eyes. Smile
    [+] The following 2 members thanked thanked Patrick for this post:2 members thanked Patrick for this post
      • Sagittarius, Aaron
    βαθμιαίος (Offline)

    Doughty Seeker
    Posts: 1,758
    Threads: 33
    Joined: Jan 2009
    #7
    08-06-2012, 06:22 PM
    (08-06-2012, 05:29 PM)Bring4th_Austin Wrote: And this wasn't just a mistake in communication...Ra specifically said that they consider our local star system to be a galaxy. Why?

    I was just thinking about this today. I think they were considering the creation of a Logos to be a universe and the creation of a sub-Logos to be a galaxy. For example:

    Quote:13.13 Questioner: Was the galaxy that we are in created by the infinite intelligence or was it created by a portion of the infinite intelligence?

    Ra: I am Ra. The galaxy and all other things of material of which you are aware are products of individualized portions of intelligent infinity. As each exploration began, it, in turn, found its focus and became co-Creator. Using intelligent infinity each portion created an universe and allowing the rhythms of free choice to flow, playing with the infinite spectrum of possibilities, each individualized portion channeled the love/light into what you might call intelligent energy, thus creating the so-called Natural Laws of any particular universe.

    Each universe, in turn, individualized to a focus becoming, in turn, co-Creator and allowing further diversity, thus creating further intelligent energies regularizing or causing Natural Laws to appear in the vibrational patterns of what you would call a solar system. Thus, each solar system has its own, shall we say, local coordinate system of illusory Natural Laws. It shall be understood that any portion, no matter how small, of any density or illusory pattern contains, as in an holographic picture, the One Creator which is infinity. Thus all begins and ends in mystery.

    Ironically, this is one quote where they did use "solar system" instead of "galaxy."
    [+] The following 1 member thanked thanked βαθμιαίος for this post:1 member thanked βαθμιαίος for this post
      • Patrick
    zenmaster (Offline)

    Member
    Posts: 5,541
    Threads: 132
    Joined: Jan 2009
    #8
    08-06-2012, 07:15 PM (This post was last modified: 08-06-2012, 07:19 PM by zenmaster.)
    (08-06-2012, 05:29 PM)Bring4th_Austin Wrote: Ra specifically said that they consider our local star system to be a galaxy. Why?
    I think it's due to the time/space and multidimensional nature of star systems which is not measurable yet. They chose the best word that we had, and that was 'galaxy' - because, perhaps the actual manifold and extensive constructs involved - hyper-dimensionally and metaphysically - would be better defined by that term.


    After considering that quote, it could be that the holographic nature of an area of creation - a solar system - is merely sufficient to express the entirety its host galaxy. That is, within the constraints of Ra's level of consciousness.
    [+] The following 3 members thanked thanked zenmaster for this post:3 members thanked zenmaster for this post
      • Patrick, Conifer16, Aaron
    Conifer16 (Offline)

    You're brilliant! :-)
    Posts: 745
    Threads: 56
    Joined: Feb 2011
    #9
    08-07-2012, 01:05 AM (This post was last modified: 08-07-2012, 01:09 AM by Conifer16.)
    so then this quote was proven by the article about how the further away we get from our solar system the more different the laws of physics as we know them are? i'll try and find it
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/201...004112.htm

    so does this quote also suggest that eventually we could all become as the sun is to ourselves, a logos of beings we helped create. Basically the next step after the solar system following the galaxy and universe. And what do you think might that creation then be? :-) Now thats a fascinating question, at least to me :-)

    Conifer17
    Namaste
    I love you <3 :-)

      •
    Sagittarius (Offline)

    Member
    Posts: 1,332
    Threads: 49
    Joined: Nov 2011
    #10
    08-07-2012, 07:03 AM (This post was last modified: 08-07-2012, 07:04 AM by Sagittarius.)
    (08-06-2012, 06:17 PM)Patrick Wrote: But "There are no mistakes under the Law of One" ~ Ra 12.24 Wink



    (08-06-2012, 05:29 PM)Bring4th_Austin Wrote: I think one of the more curious communication kerfuffles in the material is Ra's use of the word "galaxy." Why would Ra have a different definition for an English word with its origins being directly related to the Milky Way Galaxy?

    And this wasn't just a mistake in communication...Ra specifically said that they consider our local star system to be a galaxy. Why?

    Why indeed. Maybe there is a lot more to our "star system" than meets the eyes. Smile

    Maybe because all is one Wink.

    (08-06-2012, 07:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote:
    (08-06-2012, 05:29 PM)Bring4th_Austin Wrote: Ra specifically said that they consider our local star system to be a galaxy. Why?
    I think it's due to the time/space and multidimensional nature of star systems which is not measurable yet. They chose the best word that we had, and that was 'galaxy' - because, perhaps the actual manifold and extensive constructs involved - hyper-dimensionally and metaphysically - would be better defined by that term.


    After considering that quote, it could be that the holographic nature of an area of creation - a solar system - is merely sufficient to express the entirety its host galaxy. That is, within the constraints of Ra's level of consciousness.

    Or you could say that, either works.
    [+] The following 1 member thanked thanked Sagittarius for this post:1 member thanked Sagittarius for this post
      • Patrick
    Siren

    Guest
     
    #11
    08-07-2012, 09:47 AM
    (08-06-2012, 06:17 PM)Patrick Wrote: But "There are no mistakes under the Law of One" ~ Ra 12.24

    But there are (grammatical) mistakes in the Ra Material.
    [+] The following 2 members thanked thanked for this post:2 members thanked for this post
      • LetGo, Monica
    Patrick (Offline)

    YAY - Yet Another You
    Posts: 5,635
    Threads: 64
    Joined: Mar 2012
    #12
    08-07-2012, 01:28 PM
    (08-07-2012, 09:47 AM)Siren Wrote:
    (08-06-2012, 06:17 PM)Patrick Wrote: But "There are no mistakes under the Law of One" ~ Ra 12.24

    But there are mistakes in the Ra Material ^.~

    Indeed. Smile

      •
    AnthroHeart (Offline)

    Anthro at Heart
    Posts: 19,119
    Threads: 1,298
    Joined: Jan 2010
    #13
    08-07-2012, 07:21 PM (This post was last modified: 08-07-2012, 07:25 PM by AnthroHeart.)
    (08-07-2012, 01:05 AM)Conifer16 Wrote: so does this quote also suggest that eventually we could all become as the sun is to ourselves, a logos of beings we helped create. Basically the next step after the solar system following the galaxy and universe. And what do you think might that creation then be? :-) Now thats a fascinating question, at least to me :-)

    Conifer17
    Namaste
    I love you <3 :-)

    That is fascinating. I'm glad I'm waking back up, because this stuff really excites me. Perhaps in 4D we have a Universe within us. I'm not sure. I'd want to be a planetary Logos, if we got to choose our creations. I think 4D might train us to be co-creators. I'd have a planet of anthro beings I could love with a great love. In 4D we realize new levels of love.

    I heard it said that there are beings who love us 10,000 as much as a mother loves her baby. I believe it was Little Grandmother who said that. That shows what 4D love can be. A Logos is really beginning to understand the love/light and light/love.

      •
    Conifer16 (Offline)

    You're brilliant! :-)
    Posts: 745
    Threads: 56
    Joined: Feb 2011
    #14
    08-08-2012, 12:17 AM (This post was last modified: 08-08-2012, 12:18 AM by Conifer16.)
    One individualized consciousness creates one galaxy of stars, the type that has many millions of stars in it. Does this happen?
    Ra: I am Ra. This can happen. The possibilities are infinite. Thus a Logos may create what you call a star system or it may be the Logos creating billions of star systems. This is the cause of the confusion in the term galaxy, for there are many different Logos entities or creations and we would call each, using your sound vibration complexes, a galaxy.


    does this help clear up anything?

    oops, cut off part of the quote. lol sorry.




    Questioner: Thank you. Does a unit of consciousness, an individualized unit of consciousness, create a unit of the creation? I will give an example.

    One individualized consciousness creates one galaxy of stars, the type that has many millions of stars in it. Does this happen?


    Ra: I am Ra. This can happen. The possibilities are infinite. Thus a Logos may create what you call a star system or it may be the Logos creating billions of star systems. This is the cause of the confusion in the term galaxy, for there are many different Logos entities or creations and we would call each, using your sound vibration complexes, a galaxy.

    [+] The following 1 member thanked thanked Conifer16 for this post:1 member thanked Conifer16 for this post
      • Patrick
    Shin'Ar

    Guest
     
    #15
    08-08-2012, 02:27 PM
    How does Ra define a Logos?
    [+] The following 1 member thanked thanked for this post:1 member thanked for this post
      • Patrick
    Spaced (Offline)

    Dark Star
    Posts: 2,702
    Threads: 61
    Joined: Jul 2012
    #16
    08-08-2012, 04:21 PM
    I believe Ra defines a Logos as the focusing of infinity into intelligent energy.

    Quote:13.7 Ra: Awareness led to the focus of infinity into infinite energy. You have called this by various vibrational sound complexes, the most common to your ears being “Logos” or “Love.” The Creator is the focusing of infinity as an aware or conscious principle called by us as closely as we can create understanding/learning in your language, intelligent infinity.
    [+] The following 2 members thanked thanked Spaced for this post:2 members thanked Spaced for this post
      • Patrick, Aaron
    Bring4th_Austin (Offline)

    Moderator
    Posts: 2,784
    Threads: 212
    Joined: Dec 2010
    #17
    08-24-2012, 11:46 PM
    I've split the yellow ray discussion into this thread.
    _____________________________
    The only frontier that has ever existed is the self.

      •
    AnthroHeart (Offline)

    Anthro at Heart
    Posts: 19,119
    Threads: 1,298
    Joined: Jan 2010
    #18
    08-24-2012, 11:58 PM
    (08-08-2012, 04:21 PM)Spaced Wrote: I believe Ra defines a Logos as the focusing of infinity into intelligent energy.

    Quote:13.7 Ra: Awareness led to the focus of infinity into infinite energy. You have called this by various vibrational sound complexes, the most common to your ears being “Logos” or “Love.” The Creator is the focusing of infinity as an aware or conscious principle called by us as closely as we can create understanding/learning in your language, intelligent infinity.

    My take is that is a black hole. It's the only force in the Universe that is infinitely dense.

      •
    Shin'Ar

    Guest
     
    #19
    08-25-2012, 08:35 AM
    (08-08-2012, 04:21 PM)Spaced Wrote: I believe Ra defines a Logos as the focusing of infinity into intelligent energy.

    Quote:13.7 Ra: Awareness led to the focus of infinity into infinite energy. You have called this by various vibrational sound complexes, the most common to your ears being “Logos” or “Love.” The Creator is the focusing of infinity as an aware or conscious principle called by us as closely as we can create understanding/learning in your language, intelligent infinity.



    Therefore a logos is not any one planet or celestial body, or fragment of consciousness, but the infinite intelligence behind creation.

    Which is exactly what Ra has tried to explain in the questioners insistence on its acknowledging their perception of sub logos.
    [+] The following 1 member thanked thanked for this post:1 member thanked for this post
      • Spaced
    « Next Oldest | Next Newest »

    Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)



    • View a Printable Version
    • Subscribe to this thread

    © Template Design by D&D - Powered by MyBB

    Connect with L/L Research on Social Media

    Linear Mode
    Threaded Mode