Share your vision for the harvest

[Tenet Nosce]

3D harvest is the process by which entities are separated from one another, based upon polarity, and placed into a new sphere of experience. The options are: repeat of 3D, 4D negative, or 4D positive.

Are we on the same page so far?

Yes.

OK. Next step.

In consideration of the remainder of the Ra material, along with just plain observations of people we know in our lives, and the masses "at large" as witnessed in how various global events are currently playing out, we should expect that the results of harvest, once complete and tallied, to be:

4D negative - a small, but not insignificant, portion of humanity
4D positive - a moderate proportion of humanity, but not the overwhelming majority
repeat 3D - the largest portion of humanity

Can we agree to this general outline?

I offer this in full understanding that:

A. Nobody really knows, and
B. Anything can happen

What I mean to say is, I am asking this not in a philosophical sense, or in consideration of the grandest scheme of "what is possible". I am asking in the sense of what we can reasonably ascertain as likely, from our vantage point here in September 2011, applying the fullest extent of both logic and feeling that is available to us in this moment.

I hope you're not implying that that's my position.

No, and I do apologize to everybody because I am realizing that I am probably adding to the confusion by my manner of posting.

My posts tend to start out as a specific reply to what somebody wrote, and then get more general towards the end. I could do a better job of delineating where the specific part ends and the general part begins.

I take Ra's statements literally re: energy centers, pyramids, Maldek, spider bites, harvest, etc., and I try to use and apply what they gave. It's just that in the case of harvest I haven't been able to see my way clear to an understanding of what Ra says in a way that makes complete sense.

Given your current situation, what would it take to have that clarity? What piece of information would solve the puzzle? Because if it is indeed a puzzle, then it is meant to be solved.

Trust me, I "get it" about living in the "wonder and mystery" of life. But this means progressively opening up to greater and greater mysteries as the lesser ones get solved. So I am not one to be content with just taking everything at face value and proclaiming myself as to be so utterly small minded as to not be able to understand the larger meaning, even if there is one.

I don't think it's enough to say, "the preponderance of the evidence is on this side or that."

It may not be enough, but nevertheless an assessment can be made at any point along the way. Look, I work every day with people whose bodies are drastically malfunctioning. I need to come up with a hypothesis, based upon the preponderance of the evidence, and make my professional best guess.

Just because I make a best guess does not preclude new information coming along that might demonstrate me to be 100% wrong. That is okay. Nobody is going to run me through the streets because I made a mistake. I simply gave my opinion at a certain point in time, based upon the limited information which was available at that time.

So, again, you are free to not say. But I still would like to know.

I think there must be a way to interpret Ra's statements that incorporates all of them, gradualist and sudden, into a coherent, consistent narrative. I'm just not sure what it is.

I'm totally down with this. In fact, it is why I am here. So we could begin by attempting to define what sort of characteristics that such an interpretation would possess? What are the key elements, or statements, that need to be accounted for?

A great deal of my yammering on here isn't, as you know, aimed at you directly. My frustration is primarily because we can't even seem to agree upon what simple words even mean. Invariably, somebody comes along and offers an "alternative" definition that essentially redefines a word into its opposite. This is pointless behavior.

I get it. I understand. Words are merely symbols for a larger reality. I'm not a dolt. Yet we are all here using words to communicate on an Internet forum. That's what communication is... exchange of information based upon a common understanding of language.

So getting back to the age-old quote, if Ra says that the earth was in fourth density in 1981, then either it actually WAS in fourth density in 1981 OR Ra was wrong.

[START GENERAL PORTION OF MY REPLY]

What I see happening sometimes (and I could possibly be wrong myself) is that somebody is too timid or afraid to come right out and say that Ra was wrong in their opinion. Therefore all manner of contrivances are made to try to piece things together in a somewhat incoherent way. This detracts from the overall potential of the experience we are having here.