What is everyone's gut feeling on 2012?

[Richard]

From the(oddly enough...or perhaps I was supposed to find it on the same day 8 yrs later) the 2-4-2001 Qu'o Meditation
"....The concept of ascension is a concept that we have found largely within your cultures’ Christian belief systems. The beliefs vary, but the basic commonality of this idea centers upon the concept of some entities being physically removed from the surface of the Earth to safe places at a time when the remainder of the population of the Earth will be destroyed by the end of the world or some other version of the apocalypse, whether the cause of it be man or spirit.

....It is not our understanding that this concept is a helpful one spiritually. It is not our opinion that this is the way things work in any physical sense. In our opinion the processes of ascension or harvest are subsumed within the process of moving through the physical death and entrance into larger life, as this instrument would put it.....

Harvest is not a world spanning event. It is, rather, a personal journey found beyond death's door. Add the material above to the original Ra material that predicted up to a 700 yr transitional phase? And 2012 is going to be, I think, business as usual as far as the world goes. People will pass on, babies will be born...families will be raised. Disasters will occur. People will pick themselves up and go on. In other words, life goes on.

But hopefully, the rest of the population will begin to awaken and maybe we can begin to make a difference in the world.
Richard

Very elegantly,eloquently, and hope-filled stated Richard. Thank you for sharing this piece of oddly found synergy, as you describe it. It may indeed be for reason. Picking up from my previous theory "that all is theory" at the end of the day, and that theory may be argued to be a bit analogous to faith in many ways, and given that there exists the "Christian Rapture/Ra Spontaneous Event" camp, verses the "Christian Gradualist/Ra Gradualist" camp in kind, I've often asked myself what the psychology purporting either position might suggest about either? Beginning from the start premise-point that faith and theory are closely linked, what then is in it for one to argue for one unknown position verses another unknown position (like arguing over fake diamonds as suggested in my previous post "Strictly Law of One/About Social Values post #33") if in fact neither are known? Remember always, the LOO states: we are meant not to know in 3D. Perhaps as much, or more, is revealed of the individual holding the position, than in the truth about what may not be known, i.e. in this case arguing for death verses life. It may be further argued that at least in the Christian context of The Rapture, one is nonetheless arguing for a sustained life (albeit a favored life) position in any event, whereas in the Ra/loO argument of as a 'Spontaneous event', one calling for the total physical death and annihilation of the physical vehicle? One must for oneself, and rightly so rather quickly, given that neither may be known, ask what this might at least suggest about one's inner deeper psychology? More to the point yet, and if one spends a vast amount of time, and even years, arguing this position as a student, or self-appointed speaker for this position, and finding a plethora of reasons in vagaries for this position, might it not equally suggest that one isn't very happy with his present lot, and that there may indeed be a hoped for payoff in getting out of this present 3D predicament one in fact signed up for to begin with?

I would argue that we're here now. I would further argue that unless one were dead of life or feeling, and assuming one were versed in either Christian beliefs or LOO beliefs, and held either one in faith to any degree, one would need take up the position for one or the other to at least a greater or lessor degree. I would further argue that since neither may be known, and that either may or may not be true, that taking up the mantle for either position reveals far more about the inner psychology than anything else in this moment. I would close by suggesting that the only argument against this is to re-assume with rigor the original position of either theory with faith as an argument against this, only to begin the loop all over again.

What may be in it for anyone to argue for death, except of course a better life? Forgive the pun. But if one is in love with oneself in the abstract and positive sense, then I dare say one is in love with everyone else as a consequence, and as such is in love with life as well. As proof to this simple thought experiment I would offer that there is not a soul on this plane who would not fight for the life for someone they dearly loved, including his own. Nor would he wish for that someone to give up their life for any reason (including getting to heaven or 4D), as "Heaven Can Wait" (as much as can 4D). We know we know this. No? Then what is in it for the one wishing and arguing to get out sooner, rather than later? He wouldn't wish it for his dog, much less his child, much less his brother, much less his lover. Then why wish it as a theory or faith for himself, much less the Planet and all of life on it?

Loving life, I remain faithful as theory to it,

Q

Quantum,

Good points. Perhaps the leaning towards one point of view or the other is a reflection of ones view of life at this given time. The Qu’o and LOO do seem to contradict each other in the finer points at times. But I think their basic messages remain the same. Which to me says (at its most basic) is that the Creator is with you as you are with the Creator, live with love in your heart, share that love with those around you, live in the moment and do not fear.

In the end, as you say…its all theory or faith. I guess we’ll all solve the mysteries of the universe when our time comes. But lets not wish that upon our selves too soon. I still have things to experience and share with the Creator.

I’m not finished yet.

Richard

[Quantum]

From Quo: see above for full quote "....The concept of ascension is a concept that we have found largely within your cultures’ Christian belief systems. .......when the remainder of the population of the Earth will be destroyed by the end of the world or some other version of the apocalypse, whether the cause of it be man or spirit.

It is not our understanding that this concept is a helpful one spiritually. It is not our opinion that this is the way things work in any physical sense. In our opinion the processes of ascension or harvest are subsumed within the process of moving through the physical death and entrance into larger life, as this instrument would put it.....

I said: ....Beginning from the start premise-point that faith and theory are closely linked, what then is in it for one to argue for one unknown position verses another unknown position (like arguing over fake diamonds as suggested in my previous post "Strictly Law of One/About Social Values post #33") if in fact neither are known? Remember always, the LOO states: we are meant not to know in 3D. Perhaps as much, or more is revealed of the individual holding one position vs another, than in the truth about what may not be known, i.e. in this case arguing for death verses life. It may be further argued that at least in the Christian context of The Rapture, one is nonetheless arguing for a sustained life (albeit a favored life) position in any event, whereas in the Ra/loO argument of a 'Spontaneous event', one is calling for the total physical death and annihilation of the physical vehicle? One must for oneself, and rightly so rather quickly, given that neither may be known, ask what this might at least suggest about one's inner deeper psychology? More to the point yet, and if one spends a vast amount of time, and even years, arguing this position as a student, or self-appointed speaker for this position, and finding a plethora of reasons in vagaries for this position, might it not equally suggest that one isn't very happy with his present lot, and that there may indeed be a hoped for payoff in getting out of this present 3D predicament one in fact signed up for to begin with?

...What may be in it for anyone to argue for death, except of course a better life? Forgive the pun. But if one is in love with oneself in the abstract and positive sense, then I dare say one is in love with everyone else as a consequence, and as such is in love with life as well. As proof to this simple thought experiment I would offer that there is not a soul on this plane who would not fight for the life for someone they dearly loved, including his own. Nor would he wish for that someone to give up their life for any reason (including getting to heaven or 4D), as "Heaven Can Wait" (as much as can 4D). We know we know this. No? Then what is in it for the one wishing and arguing to get out sooner, rather than later? He wouldn't wish it for his dog, much less his child, much less his brother, much less his lover. Then why wish it as a theory or faith for himself, much less the Planet and all of life on it?
[/quote]

Quantum
Good points. Perhaps the leaning towards one point of view or the other is a reflection of ones view of life at this given time. ....the Creator is with you as you are with the Creator, live with love in your heart, share that love with those around you, live in the moment and do not fear.

In the end, as you say…its all theory or faith. I guess we’ll all solve the mysteries of the universe when our time comes. But lets not wish that upon our selves too soon. I still have things to experience and share with the Creator.

I’m not finished yet.

Richard

Well said Richard. I am reminded of the GAELIC Blessing: "May the good Lord take a liken to ye, But not too much, and not too soon!"

I will close with a scene I am further reminded of from a great American novel by the late Joseph Heller called "Catch 22." The main protagonist in the story is Yossarian who is lying in bed with Nurse Nurse (she is a nurse with the last name of Nurse). Both are devout atheists. Here is the beautiful inside-out mind of Heller: he has both in bed having an argument about the God each does not believe in. Nurse Nurse, who does not belive in God, does not believe in a God who is benevolent, kind, and merciful, whereas Yossarian, who equally does not believe in God does not believe in a God who is malevolent, wrathful, and unforgiving. Even in either's non-belief, both reveal a great deal about their psychology, just as much as do those professing a greater belief in the LOO, but with one holding the position of life over death. Surely it reveals much about either's inner psychology.

To life,

Q

[airwaves]

Now I for one disagree with one of your statements Quantum. "Nor would he wish for that someone to give up their life for any reason (including getting to heaven or 4D), as "Heaven Can Wait" (as much as can 4D)." I would not have a problem with someone giving up there life to get to 4d/heaven were it a sure thing and the situation were dire. I know it is situational and I know that every experience gained here is a valuable one, but lets face it they are going on to something better and physical death seems very trivial in the light of all of that. I for one would not give up my own life unless it were to save someone or a group of people from something terrible i.e. no suicide; for I know and understand that every experience gained here is valuable and I crave all that I can get my hands on. Maybe just maybe the sacrifice of the self could itself be a catalyst to learn from in hindsight though. Food for thought and all we really know is that we don't know for sure. I personally think and hope that the gradualist version is true, but to reinforce my desire/thought Q'uo says that it is the way that it will happen. Now for the purpose of 3d it could be purposeful misinformation to keep the confusion going, and I accept that to. Either way what is meant to happen will happen and we will all be better off in the end; so lets party and try not to think about it too much ehh?

That is just my 2 cents and I am still possibly/probably wrong. Its all good my friends.

Love and Peace

[Lavazza]

I really enjoyed those last few posts, Quantum. I think you raise excellent points and are well worth thinking more about, regardless of where you stand on the 2012 question.

I think Airwaves makes a great point too- that the fact that we have two large groups of seekers who believe things are going to be vastly different in 2012 is just for our benefit as seekers. Our freewill is preserved. I can't tell you how helpful it's been to come to my own conclusions about this debate. On the intellectual as well as spiritual level. I walk with a lot more confidence these days than before I woke up.

For myself, the instant shift idea never resonated well. But if I were to look further, a lot of people forget that the Q'uo is actually a group of three entities or social memory complexes together. They are Hatton, Latwii, and... Ra. Yes indeed. Now, the conscious vs. unconscious debate doesn't hold up for me on the issue of the harvest. Lets assume that the ratio of instrument-manipulation vs. undistorted information is 30% / 70% as previously stated. Even with 30% being altered, the message has time and time again been that the harvest is not an instant shift situation. Carla and Q'uo have been channeling for decades now. I would expect that if it were not gradual, it would have come through. But even if we disregard those percentages, when listening to the audio recordings of Q'uo sessions you will occasionally hear Carla say "We correct this instrument..." and she goes back to rephrase or clarify something that she messed up. If Carla were really interpreting the message wrong over these last few decades, I can't imagine that Q'uo would just sit around and let such an important note go uncorrected. They have an extreme polarization towards service towards others. If they let their message get so screwed up they would lose polarity quite quickly, and I suspect they wouldn't have allowed the communications to continue for very long at all.

But again, my argument still can't prove anything to anyone! It's just my interpretation of what I know. And there's always a way to dismantle anyone's supporting arguments. That's the beauty of our current situation, we have to think for ourselves, listen to our souls, and ultimately decide what we believe in faith.

[freemason]

I have until I began reading bring 4th thought that the earth changes model was a rule not an option, especially given the indications about a polar shift, ice melting, and climate change. With sadness I considered that our time and potential for learning as a race was going to be much curtailed. With the confirmatory info that I missed from Quo, and the time line, potential reality issues, it appears that change will be gradual. This will in my opinion be much more likely if we as earths children work forthrightly on climate change initiatives. Being brought together over this problem will yield great spiritual reward I think

[Quantum]

Now I for one disagree with one of your statements Quantum. "Nor would he wish for that someone to give up their life for any reason (including getting to heaven or 4D), as "Heaven Can Wait" (as much as can 4D)."....

(continuing, you say...)...physical death seems very trivial in the light of all of that..... Maybe just maybe the sacrifice of the self could itself be a catalyst to learn from in hindsight though.
Love and Peace

Thank you airwaves for participating. Re-reading my quote in the context meant, "Nor would he wish", is explicitly stating that it is not for me nor for anyone to wish death for anyone, much less the entire planet, whether I think it is for their greater good or not. If death by choice for a greater good, or even a lessor good, is wished for oneself, that is another matter, but not one for me or anyone to wish for another or for all. You are however more than correct when stating "maybe just maybe the sacrifice of the self could itself be a catalyst". Ra in fact speaks very specifically and profoundly to this very point in the case of war as being one of the greatest catalysts offered mankind in terms of giving one's life for another. However, in this discussion/case no one is asked to give up one's life for another in the addressing of theory. These are thought exercises only. As such, we are speaking to a belief structure of the total annihilation to the physical vehicle as death, verses the gradual evolution of the soul, and the preservation of life in the process, and as theory no less, this as regards the 'Spontaneous Event' camp verses the "Gradualist" camp. My point remains in the abstract: given we don't know, and that there is strong evidence (in theory) to support either camp, what does supporting one position verses the other state about the deeper inner psychology of an individual holding strongly to one position verses the other. Surely it says something very profoundly? I would humbly offer, as an exercise only (if not a deeper understanding of ourselves) that either individually, or as a group, that we not obscure or duck this question. I believe if we have the courage, it silently screams for an answer.

I really enjoyed those last few posts, Quantum. I think you raise excellent points and are well worth thinking more about....
For myself, the instant shift idea never resonated well....Carla and Q'uo have been channeling for decades now. I would expect that if it were not gradual, it would have come through. .. They (Quo) have an extreme polarization towards service towards others. If they let their message get so screwed up they would lose polarity quite quickly, and I suspect they wouldn't have allowed the communications to continue for very long at all.

Thank you Lavazza. Well said I believe, and good points made.

I have until I began reading bring 4th thought that the earth changes model was a rule not an option, especially given the indications about a polar shift, ice melting, and climate change. With sadness I considered that our time and potential for learning as a race was going to be much curtailed. With the confirmatory info that I missed from Quo, and the time line, potential reality issues, it appears that change will be gradual. This will in my opinion be much more likely if we as earths children work forthrightly on climate change initiatives. Being brought together over this problem will yield great spiritual reward I think

Again, in my humble opinion, well said Freemason. I wonder if my invitation to look within ourselves might be a point worthy of discussion as a group (?) as regards these differing camps, and what in fact this says about our self/ourselves, in as much as a position calls to be taken, less one wishes to assume a Spock-ian / Buddhist approach of not assuming either. Were this a position or stance, then participation means little, as much as would exploring or discussing same. Dispensing with the virtues of a Spock-ian/Buddhist "it is better/wiser to assume no position" position, and not withstanding this position, it may matter very much, in as much as it may reveal much about oneself.

Curious.......

Q

[Quantum]

I just noted that to date there have been 2,553 views to this thread. It would seem, if I am proficient in searching the bring4th threads, that this is the single most (if not at least one of the most) viewed threads of all to date. This being the case, it is clear statement and proof that resounds, and may even serve as a cross section of the population as a whole, that we as a species hold always to the utmost concern the value of this life and of those we hold dearest and love. It drives the previous point above as an invitation that we may perhaps do well to question ourselves as to what we also hold as "thought" regarding what we hold dearest as "value"? I would welcome a dialog as regards this force that drives some (historically) to feel what they feel as regards this repeating story that the end is near? Our end is always as near as our next breath in any event. We as students of the LOO may all agree that "change is a comin", but need it entail death? My invitation stands: Why do we do this, and what does it say about the psychology of this, given that one may read into anything or read out of anything what one will. Why would one then hold fast and even argue fervently for it (death), and what does it say? Surely it bears looking at?

Living in faith for life, verses it's converse,

Q

[airwaves]

Quantum you are a very intelligent and powerful individual, and it is sightly overwhelming. That being the reason for my delay in response; for I may be above average in intelligence by human standards (not counting grammar :p) you must be quite the genius. I find myself at odds to debate this too much further for my last argument was my final one. I want and believe the words that Q'uo says on the subject of harvest (witch Richard quotes in post #85) basically outline exactly what it will be like and I find it extremely difficult to believe that they would apply the law of confusion to this subject to such a degree. I will admit that for awhile I was of the spontaneous camp until reading a session that stated that the polar shifts had already happened. It may in fact be the same session that Rich quoted and it simply did not register with me. I don't know(need to reread it lol). What I do know is that I do agree that there is a lot to be said about a person depending on what camp they so choose and my only excuse for originally choosing the spontaneous camp is that all of the fear mongering mayan calender shenanigans bent my opinion slightly. There is a great lesson to be learned from this debate for there is a lesson in everything my friend.

Forgive me if my statement is short or incomplete, it is late at night and I just had my night cap. :p

Love and Peace my brothers and sisters

[airwaves]

As another after thought (I am just full of these) I also apologize for misquoting you. It is not my intention to twist words.

[Monica]

But even if we disregard those percentages, when listening to the audio recordings of Q'uo sessions you will occasionally hear Carla say "We correct this instrument..." and she goes back to rephrase or clarify something that she messed up. If Carla were really interpreting the message wrong over these last few decades, I can't imagine that Q'uo would just sit around and let such an important note go uncorrected. They have an extreme polarization towards service towards others. If they let their message get so screwed up they would lose polarity quite quickly, and I suspect they wouldn't have allowed the communications to continue for very long at all.

That pretty much wraps it up for me.

---

Quantum you are a very intelligent and powerful individual, and it is sightly overwhelming. That being the reason for my delay in response; for I may be above average in intelligence by human standards (not counting grammar :p) you must be quite the genius.

Good observation!

...I find it extremely difficult to believe that they would apply the law of confusion to this subject to such a degree.

Agreed!

---

We as students of the LOO may all agree that "change is a comin", but need it entail death? My invitation stands: Why do we do this, and what does it say about the psychology of this, given that one may read into anything or read out of anything what one will. Why would one then hold fast and even argue fervently for it (death), and what does it say? Surely it bears looking at?

In all fairness, my understanding of those adhering to the 'spontaneous' theory is that they expect to be transported/uplifted/ascended/transmuted or by some other such mechanism into 4D reality, without the inconvenience of death of the physical vehicle. If anything, they are seeking to avoid death, in favor of the transformation of the 3D vehicle.

Which means...that they're not seeing the Oneness of Life...whether here in 3D reality or elsewhere, it's all good.

I think you ask a valid question, regarding the psychology of the choice of instantaneous vs gradual shift.

So why the preference? I've noticed that many a 'New Age' channel still fits their info into the 'rapture' allegorical structure...so the question is WHY is there such a yearning to be rescued?

It would seem to me that, on the surface, the adherence to a 'rescue' scenario, whether it's Jesus in the clouds, alien spaceships, or an instantaneous 'poof' in any case always seems to represent an attitude of expectance...that something will be done TO the person, rather than an embracing of one's power to decide for oneself one's reality...ie. passive rather than active...events happening TO the person instead of the person CREATING and manifesting those events.

I always go back to what Q'uo said, that, while activism might be wonderful for those who gravitate towards such, the single most important thing anyone can do to manifest 4D reality is to transmute their own negative emotions into LOVE...on a daily basis...Hence, the focus on some external phenomena or event transforming one's reality, rather than realizing the power inherent within, seems to indicate a refusal or denial of said power...and opportunity missed.

[Quantum]

Well said Dear Monica. Thank you for joining in. I would be curious to pursue the question, and your thoughts if I may?

In all fairness, my understanding of those adhering to the 'spontaneous' theory is that they expect to be transported/uplifted/ascended/transmuted or by some other such mechanism into 4D reality, without the inconvenience of death of the physical vehicle. If anything, they are seeking to avoid death, in favor of the transformation of the 3D vehicle.

This may all be good and well as regards the one going "puff", this as relates to his understanding, or belief, if not self-delude desire for same. But, what of his fellow man, who, for whatever reasons, is not accorded the grace of this knowledge, and who surely must die a real and very experiential death, and as a result perhaps somewhat less staid and accepting, if not altogether terrifying, inclusive of his loved ones, children, and neighbor. What does this say about such a one's inner psychology as regards their compassion for others, if not just an expectancy as you correctly deduce, but perhaps even an elitism of sorts for themselves?
May it not suggest a selfishness of sorts as though a "New Age Spiritual Survivalist" mentality, if you will allow the phrase?

I submit that it may in fact be fear, more than fact, that drives this, as there are no facts.

Assuming hypothetically that Quo is correct, and that Ra speaks to 700 years of transition (irrespective of one interpretation as an exercise vs another) and that something surely will/is happening irrespectively, but that it may preclude death, then heading to the mountains for nothing to happen is akin to heading for the head space of 2012 that something will. The psychology of both resonate the same to a degree.The poles shifting resulting in all the bad ones falling off to leave us good ones here, or that the space brothers might take us off in their star-ships rescuing us, or the Christian rapture as you also share, resonates with exactly the same mythos as a 3D death to 4D instant transition. It strikes me that the underlying mythos of the end being near resonates always as the same...exactly the same.

Surely it says something? It also seems to be very much a "me-oriented" philosophy verses the poor soul "Left Behind" as the Christian Book and movie are entitled.

Loving the participation and the willingness to be bold enough to look at ourselves,

Q

[Monica]

Hmmm....lots to ponder here, Quantum.

We have no idea what the motivation of an other-self might be, in formulating their beliefs. We can only speculate as to their subconscious fear issues or biases. Perhaps they do indeed honestly think that the whole planet will be ready to ascend in that single moment of inspiration! Or perhaps it is the opposite...elitism or fear that seeks a rescue while the 'unsaved' perish.

I agree that there are indeed parallels to the 'rapture' doctrine...but we really can't tell what their motivation is for choosing such a belief.

What we CAN say is that there seems to be a missing of the point, to some degree...a throwing the baby out with the bathwater if you will. By focusing on what will happen to the population as a whole, responsibility of oneself is negated...something is done TO us rather than us doing something proactive...we await an external event rather than creating it from within. And THAT, imho, is the real issue.

[3D Sunset]

What we CAN say is that there seems to be a missing of the point, to some degree...a throwing the baby out with the bathwater if you will. By focusing on what will happen to the population as a whole, responsibility of oneself is negated...something is done TO us rather than us doing something proactive...we await an external event rather than creating it from within. And THAT, imho, is the real issue.

Well said, Monica! I couldn't agree more. I think there is a clear grasp, by our shared consciousness that "something is happening" and that brighter days are ahead after we resolve some outstanding issues. I believe that this is largely behind the Evangelical movement's desire to see all the "end days" prophecies come to pass. It is not that people want to die, or see others "judged", I see it rather as our natural movement upward to the pull of 4D. I think that this pull or yearning exists for both harvestable STS and STO all the way to (although to a lesser extent) those that are still asleep.

Regardless though, the first place that we need to work is within ourselves. Through calm and steady thought, this inner work will help us realize the greatest good for all. Beyond this, all we can really do is allow the universe space to manifest whatever it will, whenever it will. IMHO, our actions, thoughts, and focus cannot be swayed by any prophecies, visions, speculations, desires, needs, or assertions of anyone or anything outside ourselves. If we are grounded in our thoughts, balanced in our approach, and purposeful in our actions, we will be doing ourselves, the world, and all others in it the greatest service of all.

It may be fun to speculate about those things we cannot know, but it is ultimately as futile as arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It is transitory and immaterial what will happen, to, by, or for whom, and at what time.

Just my 2 cents (guess I couldn't resist posting after all, Q),

3D Sunset

[Quantum]

What we CAN say is that there seems to be a missing of the point, to some degree...a throwing the baby out with the bathwater if you will. By focusing on what will happen to the population as a whole, responsibility of oneself is negated...something is done TO us rather than us doing something proactive...we await an external event rather than creating it from within. And THAT, imho, is the real issue.

Well said, Monica! I couldn't agree more. I think there is a clear grasp, by our shared consciousness that "something is happening" and that brighter days are ahead after we resolve some outstanding issues. I believe that this is largely behind the Evangelical movement's desire to see all the "end days" prophecies come to pass. It is not that people want to die, or see others "judged", I see it rather as our natural movement upward to the pull of 4D. I think that this pull or yearning exists for both harvestable STS and STO all the way to (although to a lesser extent) those that are still asleep.

Regardless though, the first place that we need to work is within ourselves.
....It may be fun to speculate about those things we cannot know, but it is ultimately as futile as arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It is transitory and immaterial what will happen, to, by, or for whom, and at what time.
Just my 2 cents (guess I couldn't resist posting after all, Q),
3D Sunset

Beautifully expressed by both of you. (I am happy to see you 3D, and that the temptation was one not lost on you. Some are led to teach, as is evident in your thread on Dewey B. Larson/Science and Technology). It would seem that many of us are in large part in full agreement, or at least to a degree, and that even though speculative, that there are those of us, thankfully I would think, that are somewhat more positive as to what the possibilities may hold, verses focusing on the "gnashing of teeth" (Bible), or any fear based, if not escapist, or elitist attitudes of worthy of "being saved" (excluding by definition...those that aren't), all by something outside of ourselves, be it Jesus in the clouds on the day of the rapture, or space brothers, or instantaneous 3D to 4D transition as per the LOO no less.

My primary intent has been the humble attempt to draw us within ourselves, if willing, in the effort of searching ourselves, not so much for what I agree may in large part be a transitory answer as to a when, how, or what manner, etc, but more to what any position held as a personal bias says about ourselves individually, verses as a subset community to either belief. This search, I would imagine, is one that falls far outside of the realm of what might be defined as transitory, and one more at center of the root mind as regards the species/race consciousness as an archetype, as an inherited idea or mode of thought pertaining to the psychology of a believer of one mythos vs the other that is derived from the experience of the race and is indeed present in the unconscious of the individual.

For this reason (no longer the one focused on the debate of the gradualist vs spontaneous transient responses - albeit the groundwork first needed to be layed), it may lend as an evolved conversation on the same focus, but now more as to The Why one chooses one myth verses another, analogous if you will (and here is my point) in large respect to the study of the Tarot as archetype, but herein the archetype being our deep seated and repeating mythos of the repeating archetypal story that points for many as resonating with the same "the end is near" as a prologue to epilogue story.

Is this a conversation worthy of embracing and giving consideration to, verses the agreed to more transitory one, that may have no end (pun and double entendre intended)? Might this lend itself as a vehicle, if for even one, to have a group/personal conversation, with the courage to look within, and willing to ask why, in such a supportive group setting, with the added cloak of anonymity, to open oneself, for the benefit of yet another?

"The End Is Near as a Race Archetypal Mindset" as per the LOO.

I leave it to any willing participant to comment,

Q

[Richard]

What we CAN say is that there seems to be a missing of the point, to some degree...a throwing the baby out with the bathwater if you will. By focusing on what will happen to the population as a whole, responsibility of oneself is negated...something is done TO us rather than us doing something proactive...we await an external event rather than creating it from within. And THAT, imho, is the real issue.

Well said, Monica! I couldn't agree more. I think there is a clear grasp, by our shared consciousness that "something is happening" and that brighter days are ahead after we resolve some outstanding issues. I believe that this is largely behind the Evangelical movement's desire to see all the "end days" prophecies come to pass. It is not that people want to die, or see others "judged", I see it rather as our natural movement upward to the pull of 4D. I think that this pull or yearning exists for both harvestable STS and STO all the way to (although to a lesser extent) those that are still asleep.

Regardless though, the first place that we need to work is within ourselves.
....It may be fun to speculate about those things we cannot know, but it is ultimately as futile as arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It is transitory and immaterial what will happen, to, by, or for whom, and at what time.
Just my 2 cents (guess I couldn't resist posting after all, Q),
3D Sunset

Beautifully expressed by both of you. (I am happy to see you 3D, and that the temptation was one not lost on you. Some are led to teach, as is evident in your thread on Dewey B. Larson/Science and Technology). It would seem that many of us are in large part in full agreement, or at least to a degree, and that even though speculative, that there are those of us, thankfully I would think, that are somewhat more positive as to what the possibilities may hold, verses focusing on the "gnashing of teeth" (Bible), or any fear based, if not escapist, or elitist attitudes of worthy of "being saved" (excluding by definition...those that aren't), all by something outside of ourselves, be it Jesus in the clouds on the day of the rapture, or space brothers, or instantaneous 3D to 4D transition as per the LOO no less.

My primary intent has been the humble attempt to draw us within ourselves, if willing, in the effort of searching ourselves, not so much for what I agree may in large part be a transitory answer as to a when, how, or what manner, etc, but more to what any position held as a personal bias says about ourselves individually, verses as a subset community to either belief. This search, I would imagine, is one that falls far outside of the realm of what might be defined as transitory, and one more at center of the root mind as regards the species/race consciousness as an archetype, as an inherited idea or mode of thought pertaining to the psychology of a believer of one mythos vs the other that is derived from the experience of the race and is indeed present in the unconscious of the individual.

For this reason (no longer the one focused on the debate of the gradualist vs spontaneous transient responses - albeit the groundwork first needed to be layed), it may lend as an evolved conversation on the same focus, but now more as to The Why one chooses one myth verses another, analogous if you will (and here is my point) in large respect to the study of the Tarot as archetype, but herein the archetype being our deep seated and repeating mythos of the repeating archetypal story that points for many as resonating with the same "the end is near" as a prologue to epilogue story.

Is this a conversation worthy of embracing and giving consideration to, verses the agreed to more transitory one, that may have no end (pun and double entendre intended)? Might this lend itself as a vehicle, if for even one, to have a group/personal conversation, with the courage to look within, and willing to ask why, in such a supportive group setting, with the added cloak of anonymity, to open oneself, for the benefit of yet another?

"The End Is Near as a Race Archetypal Mindset" as per the LOO.

I leave it to any willing participant to comment,

Q

Perhaps the wish for a “quick conclusion” or an “extended conclusion” has more to do with the circumstances of the individual at this time. (I include myself here, being firmly in the gradual change camp).

Taken to its very essence, we are discussing the unknown. LOO or Qu’o channeled material not withstanding. I struggle to maintain my faith that everything is as it should be and that everything will be as it should be when my time comes. But life is okay right now and I find myself in not too much of a hurry to conclude this venture into life in general and now, into myself.

I can’t speak for people wishing for a quick conclusion to this density. Though I suspect they are simply weary of life’s struggles. For myself, I feel I have much unfinished inner work to complete…or at least get a better grasp on.

I find it comical, astonishing…and quite handy in a synchronistic way…that Carla, Jim and Don have spent the last 30 years or so channeling this material and eventually putting it on the internet for all to see. And have provided me with a literal treasure chest of catalyst at a time when I had hit rock bottom spiritually. I had, pretty much, given up on organized religions as a path for self-exploration and contemplation of the infinite. And yet…now I find myself firmly on the Inner Path and much happier for it.

I would like to think that I had more than 3 yrs to explore this newfound spirituality. But, perhaps…I set myself up for the fast path? If you “absolutely knew” that you only had 3 years to live? How would you live then?

Maybe I just answered my own question.

Richard

[Quantum]

Perhaps the wish for a “quick conclusion” or an “extended conclusion” has more to do with the circumstances of the individual at this time. (I include myself here, being firmly in the gradual change camp).

It is a wonderful point you make Richard. May any thought or word that proceeds from my mouth or mind be anything but subjective? Is there a way to have an opinion about anything, most especially on a subject as profound as this, without it being extremely subjective, verses extremely objective?

Let us assume a premise: "Each/Every opinion one holds, most particularly regarding those subjects totally incapable of being substantiated, are in fact a self evident revelation about that individual."

Does this not stand to reason? Conjure up any example:
- I believe in God/I do not believe in God
Assuming the former: The God I believe in calls for an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. This God insists we as his children enforce His will. Example - we must enforce His will on one another, perhaps leading to the logic that abortionists are murderers, leading one to justify the murder of an abortionist.
- To the converse: The God I believe in is all forgiving, all knowing, all understanding, all patient. Example: The story of the prodigal son welcomed home by the loving father.
- The end is near mythology: dress it up any way you wish, inclusive of the 3D to 4D "Instantaneous Transition" vs The Gradualist's softer view that life finds a way

I would definitively agree with your assessment that the “quick conclusion” verses “extended conclusion” certainly has more to do with the circumstances of that individual's life than anything else. As much as the 'Metaphizler' believer in question ideally wishes to believe that he believes that "action follows thought", he is in fact experientially stuck by the truth of his words revealed, sadly unaware of what he thinks or says, this reflecting the very life he leads while wishing for a better one than he has. He in fact is molded by his circumstances, molding his thoughts, molding his circumstances, growing dizzy in the process wishing it were otherwise. Would it be any wonder he would want out? His thought and philosophy are therefore quite profoundly affected by his circumstances, irrespective of the flower of his words or weight of his intellect.

Experiment: Apart from the Evangelical who makes a mountain of money by proclaiming the end is near (suggesting he has a biased motive for expressing same), show me just one extremely happy man, completely content in life, loved and very much in love, and overall possessing a very happy disposition towards life, who expresses the sentiment that "the end is near."

To the converse: show me one man that expresses the sentiment that "the end is near" and let us honestly and openly assess if he is in fact equal in any respect to his happier brother.

Would the LOO dispute this logic or the bias of holding such a thought?

Q

[Quantum]

As a side note, I have for the moment assumed the position to remain true to one or two subjects and threads thus far, this for the express purposes of exhaustively delving and questioning these one to two topics chosen, verses any attempt or assumption on my part of assuming I have the capacity of engaging in a myriad of conversations with any efficacy or outcome, verses the concentrated effort to remain true to one. On looking deeper within, I dare say I might assume and invite much the same questions as I have here as a same process, were I to find myself expressing yet another opinion on yet another topic on yet another thread.

The willingness to communicate and question ourselves as we go, leaves us open for the very growth we seek, verses the outcome of cementing ourselves ever deeper into our preconceived notions while opining on them ad nauseum, thus defeating the attempt to create our opening sought, much less an opening with and for others (another one of the many definitions of STO). Talking at someone is far different than talking with someone as much as is listening at someone far different than listening to someone as much as is opining at others on the very subject and course of growth and the evolution in consciousness while creating potential blocks in the process one is in fact seeking to open.

I assume that the willingness to look within is perhaps the "greater work" of the LOO than is the accumulation of yet more knowledge, creating yet more opining as a natural consequence, thus potentially creating the unconscious loop of cementing oneself ever deeper into our preconceived fallacies of what we think we know. "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not love, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal."

Staying awake at the wheel is part of the trick, to the point that it becomes as much a part of the work as is the work.

Why do I think what I think is as important to the work as what I think.

I think? - lol.

What do you think?

Q

[Richard]

Perhaps the wish for a “quick conclusion” or an “extended conclusion” has more to do with the circumstances of the individual at this time. (I include myself here, being firmly in the gradual change camp).

It is a wonderful point you make Richard. May any thought or word that proceeds from my mouth or mind be anything but subjective? Is there a way to have an opinion about anything, most especially on a subject as profound as this, without it being extremely subjective, verses extremely objective?

Let us assume a premise: "Each/Every opinion one holds, most particularly regarding those subjects totally incapable of being substantiated, are in fact a self evident revelation about that individual."

Does this not stand to reason? Conjure up any example:
- I believe in God/I do not believe in God
Assuming the former: The God I believe in calls for an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. This God insists we as his children enforce His will. Example - we must enforce His will on one another, perhaps leading to the logic that abortionists are murderers, leading one to justify the murder of an abortionist.
- To the converse: The God I believe in is all forgiving, all knowing, all understanding, all patient. Example: The story of the prodigal son welcomed home by the loving father.
- The end is near mythology: dress it up any way you wish, inclusive of the 3D to 4D "Instantaneous Transition" vs The Gradualist's softer view that life finds a way

I would definitively agree with your assessment that the “quick conclusion” verses “extended conclusion” certainly has more to do with the circumstances of that individual's life than anything else. As much as the 'Metaphizler' believer in question ideally wishes to believe that he believes that "action follows thought", he is in fact experientially stuck by the truth of his words revealed, sadly unaware of what he thinks or says, this reflecting the very life he leads while wishing for a better one than he has. He in fact is molded by his circumstances, molding his thoughts, molding his circumstances, growing dizzy in the process wishing it were otherwise. Would it be any wonder he would want out? His thought and philosophy are therefore quite profoundly affected by his circumstances, irrespective of the flower of his words or weight of his intellect.

Experiment: Apart from the Evangelical who makes a mountain of money by proclaiming the end is near (suggesting he has a biased motive for expressing same), show me just one extremely happy man, completely content in life, loved and very much in love, and overall possessing a very happy disposition towards life, who expresses the sentiment that "the end is near."

To the converse: show me one man that expresses the sentiment that "the end is near" and let us honestly and openly assess if he is in fact equal in any respect to his happier brother.

Would the LOO dispute this logic or the bias of holding such a thought?

Q

To the converse: show me one man that expresses the sentiment that "the end is near" and let us honestly and openly assess if he is in fact equal in any respect to his happier brother.

Would the LOO dispute this logic or the bias of holding such a thought?

Quantum,

I think we ought to separate simple interest in the 3rd to the 4th dimension ascension mechanics and actually wishing for it all to end because one is tired of dealing with life in the 3rd. One might argue that wishing for a chosen incarnation to end prematurely might be considered a leaning towards negative polarity within the LOO teachings.

I am very interested in how it all works. But I’m equally aware that I won’t know anything until I pass on. So if the secrets of the universe are denied us at this point, why worry about it? Why not work on our inner issues one day at a time and let our destiny play out as it was designed to. This is what I take from LOO and Q’uo.

To paraphrase a line from Forrest Gump…”Harvest is as Harvest does”. Whatever happens when its our time depends on what we do with the time we have.

Richard

[Lavazza]

I've got to agree- thinking for our selves may very well be one of the most important things we can do. One of the things that I'm happiest about after awakening is my greater confidence in my own judgment and thinking processes. When I would run in to a problem or important life question previously, I would fret and worry... ever seeking the advice of someone who supposedly would know better and could solve my problems.

Now, I'm certainly not saying that seeking others advice is a lost cause, of course not. However when it comes to making a decision, choosing a belief or determining what is true, that's where I've learned to trust my intuition, gut feeling, etc. It's extremely empowering.

I wrote a short truism* recently. It goes:

"One must always keep an open mind and question just about everything one reads, hears, sees or experiences. If you come to the same conclusion you had before, great. If you discover something new, so much the better."

Life's steady barrage of life events, problems, conflicts... as well as it's joys, loves, and moments of bliss are all given us for our benefit. Catalyst. The more we look within and decide for our selves, the more we grow.

* in line with my thoughts in this post, I use the word truism lightly!

[Quantum]

Quantum,

I think we ought to separate simple interest in the 3rd to the 4th dimension ascension mechanics and actually wishing for it all to end because one is tired of dealing with life in the 3rd. One might argue that wishing for a chosen incarnation to end prematurely might be considered a leaning towards negative polarity within the LOO teachings.
Richard

I apologize for my long delay in responding to both of your participation. I have been traveling extensively as of late. Thank you for your patience and willingness to engage. I hope we may continue. You've hit the nail quite squarely on the head in my mind Richard, and one that I've been subtly driving at in as much as you suggest above that "one might argue that wishing for a chosen incarnation to end prematurely might be considered a leaning towards negative polarity within the LOO teachings". Beautifully shared. This one single statement should drop like the proverbial thud. I am surprised that no one has yet to pick up on this thought expressed? The larger distinction however herein also lies with the very fact that such an individual is not merely wishing for a premature exit individually so that he may summarily be dispatched to a higher realm with all due haste, but that the entire planet and all of it's inhabitants must go by the wayside in the process to accomplish his singular goal, this based solely on what may indeed, or at least possibly, be a rather bent, if not biased interpretation to what one emphatically insists one says that Ra says. It's one thing to suggest that an individual must go, and post haste in his own mind, this based on his own free will for better or worse, but it's altogether another horse of a different color, I would imagine, that the same individual holds that the entire planet must go as well, this to fulfill his self-biased/based interpretation. Might this not be even more negatively oriented (STS) as a result than simply the mere interpretation of same, if viewed in this more personal context? His wish and "Die Hard" LoO attitude notwithstanding means of course very little in the scheme of what will or will not happen. But, as we are examining the interpretation as affects the larger 'Social Memory Complex',, namely us, it may have a dramatic effect on the other other selves, if not all of us. As such, it strikes me as at least a possibility that those of us attempting to engage ourselves in an STO mindset or vibration have a higher responsibility to quell these fears in those perhaps less inclined to have learned to think for themselves. Not all, few in fact, have achieved this nominal, if not monumental ability.

I've got to agree- thinking for our selves may very well be one of the most important things we can do.

We must think for ourselves to be sure. But, it is quite evident as our planetary history demonstrates that the population as a whole has historically demonstrated the abysmal lack of ability to do just exactly this. I am reminded of the scene in the Monty Python Movie "The Life Of Brian" where the mistaken Messiah (Brain), after having just made love to a beautiful woman, flings open the wooden shutters to his 3rd story loft, wherein butt naked and in full frontal nudity he finds himself breathing in the early morn, but with a crowd of adoring but mistaken followers looking up at him in expectation for an answer, to which he shouts to the throng, "You've got to learn to think for yourselves", at which point the multitude stare up at him, first in befuddled silence, and the camera panning up close at several of the actors who stare at each other also in dumbfounded silence, at which point the camera pulls back again at the multitude, who scream in unison.... "Yes, we've got to learn to think for ourselves."

Clearly history proves that sadly it isn't easy to think for ourselves. Television, Politics, and Madison Avenue alone are prime example. They count on the fact that we don't/can't think for ourselves. Thus, a self proclaimed teacher of a teaching assumes the mantle of taking it upon himself to disseminate a teaching, be it the Bible or even the LOO, and then proceed to go on ad nauseum about the myriad of reasons to support a particular theory, held out as truth.

Do we in STO have a responsibility to challenge this, less our weaker brother asleep at the wheel, as it were, be inclined to believe without reservation a higher intellect/supposed teaching, he strives for in earnest, and even needs, hypnotizing him to his detriment? Do we not have the same responsibility to question this for ourselves, rather than merely falling asleep at the wheel along with our slower brother.

Look only at the LOO Material itself and observe that at the beginning of each and every single reading to see that Ra pleads, asks, encourages, begs, or simply suggests, that we use our own discretion to discern. Do we?

I dare say I could write a volume of information in support of any number of theories or thoughts with the full weight of esoteric or scientific information to back either position held in diametric opposition of the other in the attempt to turn both into truths. Historically it has been done time and time again. I can mount all the evidence of literature, metaphysics, and science alike to substantiate any point incapable of being substantiated to prove anything. It just don't make it so though. I go back to my earlier point of the archetypal motif of "the end is near" as driving this insanity.

I dare say if we take it upon ourselves to do a bit of research as an experiment, and divide the question that "the end is near" verses that "it is not" that we could find many quotes from many sources, from the Koran to the Bible, and the Bhagavad Gita to the LOO to support either position. I am extremely confident that we could find many quotes by Ra that support both positions, and that the interpretation is open to the interpreter. Thats the thing about truths and beauty. They lie in the eye of the beholder. Now, who would wish to hold a truth involving a quicker death for all, not just himself, must say something rather profound about this beholder, particularly when given that this truth isn't a truth, this in spite of all of his support to the contrary, given the same quotes and information will absolutely support the converse.

I am very interested in how it all works. But I’m equally aware that I won’t know anything until I pass on. So if the secrets of the universe are denied us at this point, why worry about it?

I think we do it because we must. It is our nature. I think we pursue knowledge because it is our destiny and our path. The secrets of the Universe are profoundly what some are only beginning to whisper at the door they have yet even to knock at, this in their own humble manner, while others having already walked through the door dare boldly to approach the throne. This journey is the reason for the dance. It is a must.

Secrets are not denied. They have only yet to be unveiled.

To all that are humbly persuaded to be either fearful or in doubt (and I know your out there), question all. Watch your day grow brighter as a result. Find the Ra quotes, and any others that would have you believe otherwise. You will see there are many. Shall we attempt to do so as an exercise?

L/L

Q

[Monica]

Do we in STO have a responsibility to challenge this, less our weaker brother asleep at the wheel, as it were, be inclined to believe without reservation a higher intellect/supposed teaching, he strives for in earnest, and even needs, hypnotizing him to his detriment? Do we not have the same responsibility to question this for ourselves, rather than merely falling asleep at the wheel along with our slower brother.

Methinks: A resounding YES!

[Richard]

Richard wrote:
I am very interested in how it all works. But I’m equally aware that I won’t know anything until I pass on. So if the secrets of the universe are denied us at this point, why worry about it?

Quantum wrote:
I think we do it because we must. It is our nature. I think we pursue knowledge because it is our destiny and our path. The secrets of the Universe are profoundly what some are only beginning to whisper at the door they have yet even to knock at, this in their own humble manner, while others having already walked through the door dare boldly to approach the throne. This journey is the reason for the dance. It is a must.

Yep, you got me there. Okay, lets substitute "worry "with "ponder" or "contemplation". Maybe its splitting hairs, but "worry" seems to suggest a negative connotation..or even a leaning towards that polarity. I see nothing wrong with contemplating the secrets of the Universe. Thinking about how it all works. Right or wrong..if indeed there is a right or wrong way to ponder creation?

Sorry for my absense also. They rolled out a new firewall at work that classifies this site as "occult" and therefore, now, denies access. So I have to make time on the weekend...which has been pretty hard of late.

Richard

[Monica]

Sorry for my absense also. They rolled out a new firewall at work that classifies this site as "occult" and therefore, now, denies access.

Wow, not sure why, but for some reason that struck me as really funny...thinking about the mainstream connotation of the word 'occult' anyway...Though we are indeed occult, in the true sense of the word, being 'seeking the hidden, deeper meaning.'

[Richard]

Sorry for my absense also. They rolled out a new firewall at work that classifies this site as "occult" and therefore, now, denies access.

Wow, not sure why, but for some reason that struck me as really funny...thinking about the mainstream connotation of the word 'occult' anyway...Though we are indeed occult, in the true sense of the word, being 'seeking the hidden, deeper meaning.'

It strange Monica...I can peruse other similar sites. The main L/L Research site, UFO Boards, other channellers, the Sedona Journal for pete's sake,...But not this forum.

Richard

[Monica]

It strange Monica...I can peruse other similar sites. The main L/L Research site, UFO Boards, other channellers, the Sedona Journal for pete's sake,...But not this forum.

Whoa, that's rather uncanny. Hmmmm....

[ayadew]

Richard: Haha, I thought that occult thing was quite amusing too, but also equally sad. I will intend for your superiors to be a little more openminded and harmonized, if they have that wish.
Seems to be some powerful 'occult' stuff going on in this forum

[rva_jeremy]

I've followed David Wilcock's work for some time - it was my introduction to the Law of One. 2012 used to be very important to me. I now find the concept to be distracting to my spiritual growth. The idea of a deadline for polarization just encourages me to heap judgments on myself. I trust that whatever happens in 2012 will be for the best, and while it's taken me a long time to get to that point, I feel like releasing my anxiety about the concept has actually helped me focus on my own development more.

[ayadew]

I've followed David Wilcock's work for some time - it was my introduction to the Law of One. 2012 used to be very important to me. I now find the concept to be distracting to my spiritual growth. The idea of a deadline for polarization just encourages me to heap judgments on myself. I trust that whatever happens in 2012 will be for the best, and while it's taken me a long time to get to that point, I feel like releasing my anxiety about the concept has actually helped me focus on my own development more.

I was also introduced to the whole concept of LOO by our dear David, but I also find his work distracting now. It's a great introduction, and I am grateful for him for that, but I feel there is something wrong with David, a 'gut feeling' if you will.
There is something very deep inside him that is not harmonized, that permeates all his words, his website and his forum. There is an aggression towards criticism, judgement and an underlying purpose. It's hard to put to words. I can only intend the best for his spiritual evolution.

[rva_jeremy]

I was also introduced to the whole concept of 2012 by our dear David, but I also find his work distracting now. It's a great introduction, and I am grateful for him for that, but I feel there is something wrong with David, a 'gut feeling' if you will.
There is something very deep inside him that is not harmonized, that permeates all his words and his website. There is an aggression towards criticism, judgement and an underlying purpose. It's hard to put to words. I can only intend the best for his spiritual evolution.

It's funny, I was watching that PBS documentary on the Mormons the other night, and as they were describing the life, personality, and works of Joseph Smith, I couldn't help but think of David. It's like this archetype of the incredibly powerful spiritual person whose flaws are as amplified as his strengths.

I think Wilcock represents the real deal, honestly, as far as psychic phenomena. But having internalized his work, I find that much of it is trying to "prove" his version of the Law of One cosmology through a scientific framework, or "sell" his version of the Law of One philosophy through what approaches pop psychology. And in the end I just don't emphasize what he emphasizes.

[ayadew]

That is very true jeremy6d, I don't disagree on anything you say there.