The Australian Hominid Research/Australian Yowie Research is not only the
FIRST Web site on the Net dedicated to the research of the Yowie, but also
the largest and most well known research group in the World.
<A HREF="http://www.yowiehunters.com">
Dean/All,
Can anyone give me a list of "ALL" the inner earth
civilizations? I am making an inventory list and I
need names. What is the City of Enoch? Vedic
civilizations? Lost Ten Tribes? A while back I noticed
some of you were mentioning something about Egyptians
and tunnel entrances to the inner earth under the
pyramids of Giza, but I did not get the full story.Can
some please give me an update?
Regards,
Russ/Ivan
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
Members,
Here is some additional information from the journey of Nicholas Roerich to
Tibet in relation to Shambhala. Roerich made the journey in the 1920s. I
think that things have changed since then.
Although it is from Roerich's book of thename shambhala, I got it out of Jan
Lamprecht's book, Hollow Planets.
Dharma/Dean
Yahoo Groups removed 1 attachment from this message: Roerich on Sham.doc (application/msword)
Russ,
Who knows? In the hollow part, I think you have Vedic civilization, but Rod
M. Cluff would probably say the 12 tribes of Israel.
Insofar as the inner Ear is concerned, I think that Mike Mott's book
mentions them all, but it's nothing in a 1-2-3 order.
Dean
Russ,
The City of Enoch is said to have been a city so righteous that God removed
it from the earth. How it was removed is speculation. Was it physically
taken, or did everyone just drop dead and thus it was spiritually and
symbolically taken? And whether it exists within the earth is anyone's
guess. Depends on whether the inner earth is designated as "paradise" or
not. No one knows but many have opinions.
The Lost Ten Tribes were led away to northern countries where "mankind never
dwelt," according to history. They exist as a separate group and there's a
lot of Mormon prophecy regarding their return as being a somewhat miraculous
event, about the ice melting and their returning from the north.
Blake
civilizations? I am making an inventory list and I
need names. What is the City of Enoch? Vedic
civilizations? Lost Ten Tribes? A while back I noticed
some of you were mentioning something about Egyptians
and tunnel entrances to the inner earth under the
pyramids of Giza, but I did not get the full story.Can
some please give me an update?
Regards,
Russ/Ivan
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
Members,
The existence and nature of the Martian canals has been a tremendous enigma
over the last century. The mystery has to do with the fact that the canals
can only be seen at times, not constantly. Their existence has usually been
denied by the conventional astronomical community- what a can of worms it
would open if their existence were openly admitted.
This shouldn't really be a question because they were recorded on film by
Percival Lowell. The possibility of the old type of film which was used by
Lowell having defects which allowed the canals to show up has been
suggested, but even modern amateurs with CCD equaipments hooked up to their
telescopes have captured images of the canals, so doubts of their existence
can be put to rest. ( Everyone knows except for the professional
astronomical community. Somebody tell them! )
For the sake of orientation I am attaching two of Lowell's drawings of the
canals.
I have been thinking that they must consist of soft particle currents. This
is not so impossible, our own planet has them. Consider these comments from
Joseph H. Cater in The Ultimate Reality, Chapter 20:
http://www.healthresearchbooks.com/Authors/joseph_cater.htm
" Air currents seem to be generated from electrostatic forces caused by the
presence of concentrations of hard and soft electrons in the atmosphere. The
rush of these charges toward lower potential areas creates a charged
particle stream. This stream generates wind, because the ionized air
molecules tend to be drawn along with it. Since soft electrons are
continually disintegrating and releasing camouflaged hard electrons
contained inside, the electrostatic forces will primarily be the result of
hard electrons.
It has been demonstrated that a bar magnet which is long in proportion to
its width has a number of nodes distributed along its length.
These nodes result from the magnetic lines which tend to follow oval or
circular paths. The magnetic lines flow out of one pole and back into the
side, instead of flowing into the opposite pole. This point of entry
generates a node, which becomes the starting point for another flow out of
the
side and back into the magnet at a second node.
Geomagnetism was explained in a previous chapter as the result of charges in
the atmosphere moving with the earth in its rotation. In addition, the shell
of the earth should act then as a bar magnet. It was shown that particles
bombarding the earth tend to slow down as they penetrate the shell. A cross
section of the earth would look like two curved bar magnets 800 miles thick
and 12,000 miles long. This configuration should result in multiple nodes,
since it fits the pattern of a long, narrow bar magnet. At each nodal point
or line, there should be a magnetic flow into and out of the outer surface
of the shell, which carries a high concentration of soft electrons. The
earth's gravity would then tend to repel the ejected negative soft electrons
out beyond the confines of the magnetic flow, so that they would tend to
move north and south of the nodal line by mutual repulsion.
Magnetometers may not show great deviations in the earth's field in these
regions, because they only measure the fields produced by hard electrons.
The majority of the particles ejected at these nodes will probably be the
more stable soft electrons, which do not readily disintegrate to release the
hard electrons contained inside. Sufficient groundwork has now been laid to
explain the prevailing atmospheric winds, which are broken into six discrete
bands from the north to the south pole."
The canals of Mars are simply soft particle flows.
The question arises as their random appearance. Why aren't they always seen?
Well, soft particles are not visible, for one thing. They are composed of
photons, but they are not photons themselves, just as a house composed of
bricks is not a brick ( where did I get that analogy? ) Photons form photon
aggragates which form soft particles. When the soft particles break up,
however, the constiutuent photons get released, including the ones in the
visible band. This happens during the auroral displays- the soft particle
flow through the polar orifices of the Earth becomes accelerated due to the
build up within the hollow cavity, accelerated by the increased push of
particles passing through the Earth's shell due to sunspot activity. The
soft particles thus flowing out break up at these times and the visible
photons become visible, contrary to conventional views on the aurora.
Joseph H. Cater opines that the shell of the planet Mars must be thin as
there are no substantial openings at the poles for ventilation- the
particles irradiate back out through the shell of Mars itself. But this does
not negate the existence of magnetic nodes along the planet, which cause a
magnetic flow of charged particles, which are released by the soft particles
which capture them and transport them through the shell much in the manner
of carrier cells in biology.
Thus the visibility of the Martian canals should have some correlation to
solar flares.
By Dean De Lucia
Yahoo Groups removed 2 attachments from this message: Plate 1.gif (image/gif), Plate 9.gif (image/gif)
At the risk of being irreverent, I'll say that that doesn't surprise me.
Dean
Blake, I think I read somewhere that Joseph Smith once said that the City of
Enoch and their country was where the Gulf of Mexico is now. If that is
true, and I believe it is, then they can't be in the inner earth. They are
no longer telestial and won't abide on this planet unitl it is terestrial
again.
Blake the Ice won't melt, it will become harder and become the bridge they
use according to what I have read. But I look forward to seeing it, because
the scriptures say that it will make the parting of the Red Sea be forgotten
in comparison to the miracle that will be wrought to bring them back to the
outside.
Will Rhea
Will,
You're right. The scriptures say the ice shall "flow down at their
presence," and that a "highway shall be cast up in the midst of the great
deep." Taken literally, that could mean a bridge of ice from the ocean.
As for the City of Enoch, I suppose it could have been moved physically from
the exterior to the interior. I'm only speculating. Do you suppose the City
of Enoch and Atlantis are one in the same?
Blake
H. Wm. Rhea III wrote:
Blake, I think I read somewhere that Joseph Smith once said that the City of
Enoch and their country was where the Gulf of Mexico is now. If that is
true, and I believe it is, then they can't be in the inner earth. They are
no longer telestial and won't abide on this planet unitl it is terestrial
again.
Blake the Ice won't melt, it will become harder and become the bridge they
use according to what I have read. But I look forward to seeing it, because
the scriptures say that it will make the parting of the Red Sea be forgotten
in comparison to the miracle that will be wrought to bring them back to the
outside.
Will Rhea
Now we're into theory 101, and my idea's on this have absolutely no bearing
in science, history or anything else. I just have a feeling about this:
I believe that the ancient Greeks may have sailed westward toward the
Jaredite or Nephite civilizations, who were more advanced than we think and
that they were who the Greeks called Atlantians and Atlantis. I have
several reasons for this, but they can be explained other ways.
1... During the time before Christ's visit to the America's after his
resurrection, there is a governor who defeats the Gadianton Robbers, who is
named Lachoneus. That is a Greek name. It is true that in Lehi's trade
(read job or work) he may well have had dealings with the Greeks. It may be
that Mulek and his people landed on Greece during their exodus from
Jerusalem or traveled there by land before coming to America. I mean Mulek
being a prince of Israel, likely didn't have a lot of sailing experience and
neither did most of Israel. But the Greeks did! But it is also possible
that some Greeks did come and did stay. As an aside, I have read an
interesting story somewhere about the daughters of Zedekiah escaping
Jerusalem but none of the sons. It was British Israel stuff.
2... At the time Lehi left Jerusalem, the Greeks were probably the best
sailors. The only problems the Greeks had in exploring was their funky
beleif about going to far north or south and either burning or freezing to
death. But they had to get their ideas from somewhere and I am sure that
exaggeration came into it. But many of the things that the Greeks said
about Atlantis could be said for the Nephites or Jaredites (pick one) if you
consider exaggeration.
There are other things too, but I don't have time to think about them right
now or dig up the things I wrote about them already. But I am pretty sure
that the Greeks actually found the Jaredites. The reasons for this are few
but logical and I will list them.
1... The Greeks knew the Jews or Israelites. And the Book of Mormon says
that the Nephites wrote in reformed egyptian but spoke a modified hebrew. I
am sure that the Greeks might have recognized some of the hebrew, but they
would NOTHING about the Jaredite language, since EVERYONE else at the tower
of Babel, except Jared and his followers had their languages changed.
2... The Lord says in the scriptures of the Jaredites, that there was no
civilization greater. I can think of lots of GREAT civilizations, and if
none were greater, that means that the Jaredites are at least equal to the
greatest, if not the greatest. That would put them ahead of the Egyptians,
Romans (who were just coming into their own in the Mediterranean) or the
other eastern civilizations, all of whom the Greeks were familiar with.
3... The Jaredites were destroyed by a great civil war, and a total
destruction of their lands. This could be (without the exaggerated
embellishment) what the Greeks thought of the destruction of Atlantis. But
the Nephites weren't destroyed until 400 a.d. and the Atlantis myth was
already in common usage among many peoples.
Anyway, if you get the idea that I don't believe in Atlantis or LeMuria or
little or large grey aliens, you are right. I believe that many legends are
myths that got started through embellishment and exaggeration. Although I
have seen things that I can't explain and need no exaggeration or
embellishment to sound grand.
Will "Argyll" Rhea
Dean...
You quote Joseph Cater frequently. But WHO is he? Can you give me (and the list) information about him? A brief (or longer) biography? Is he a physicist?
Also, how about Jan Lamprecht? Besides Hollow Earth (and political books and essays), what's his background? Curious about both guys.
Unless they prefer to remain mysterious.
- Dick Fojut in Tucson
Will "Argyll" Rhea wrote:
<Anyway, if you get the idea that I don't believe in Atlantis or LeMuria or
little or large grey aliens, you are right. I believe that many legends are myths that got started through embellishment and exaggeration. Although Ihave seen things that I can't explain and need no exaggeration or
embellishment to sound grand.>
Hi--
I have been following this thread. Interesting idea about myths. I, myself, believe that man throughout time has had visions--prophetic dreams, etc. And, I believe that if we were able to talk with the 'one' who had the vision we would probably be a lot more knowledgeable today then we are. But, a vision, even for the one experiencing it, is hard to decipher, as most come through in symbols. It is a bit like an abstract painting. If all of us in this group were to be shown a painting, and then asked for an interpretation, I would bet that there would be as many different interpretations as there were people on this list. Who would be right? Probably all of us would be able to see a hint of truth, but I doubt that any of us would be absolutely correct in describing what the artist intended. The artist may not even know.
But, lets take the Mormons for an example. I only select them because a very distant grandmother of mine was one--Patty Bartlett Sessions. I have her diary, which began with her walk across the states from the east coast to Salt Lake City with Brigham Young, her good friend. She was close to 50 at the time they made their travels west and lived to be 99. I have 45 years worth of her daily writing. Unfortunately, she was not a wordy woman, and her diary is a like reading a daily scientific log.
Her diary is revealing in how religions/myths/doctrines change over time. For instance, she talks about the Saturday night get-togethers, and yes, liquor was served and cigarettes smoked. She talks about how they healed so and so while laying on hands. How they talked in tongues. What psychic visions they had...etc. Now, today, we know that the Mormon's do not indulge in either alcohol or tobacco. How did this become a rule? Well, according to her dairy Brigham Young rose to the pulpit one Sunday morning after a long Saturday night and could barely see his parishioners due to the smoky church--and he was not feeling too well after a night of partying, therefore in a cranky mood--so, right then and there he made a new Mormon Rule--forbidding alcohol & cigarettes. I do not know much about the Mormon religion today, as I am not Mormon, but my mom and dad's parents were. And, I know that if the above rule was broken, then a Mormon was forbidden to go through the Temple in Salt Lake City. I know because it happened to my mom's mom. This rule came from a man, not a God. A preacher who became legend. I only use this as an example for "how" legends become altered only because it is the only one I have written proof of.
I can also read her dairy and see how over the years there were many changes in the Mormon beliefs. And, since we are all human, I would bet that this has happened with every religion ever born. Or prophecy. Little changes over time that in the end add up to huge discrepancies. Add in the fact that many of the original books were burned for one reason or another, those left may have been written in code, or tampered with, or translated by a third, fourth or fifth party. In light of how history has been recorded through time I would say practically anything could be true, or not true. But, I would bet that there is some truth in every myth or prophecy or religion if we dig deep enough and piece together the puzzle. I have often wondered if religions are different from one another only because they were written for different cultures, yet if we looked hard enough we may discover they are pretty much based on the same principles? Some are more romantic than others, some crude, others down right scary, and maybe it is all because of the artist who wrote it, or the translator's style of dialect. I think all the books hold clues to the mystery of this planet and it's evolution, and what may still come.
I personally believe that the earth must be hollow, only because I do not see how it could keep on spinning if it weren't. Not very scientific, but that is my thought. I also think that the lands have changed over time, and that there probably was an Atlantis, which could be known or referred to by many names. I think that there, at one time, was a more perfect man than we are today, and one reason alone is because our life span is what I consider short compared to our technology. I do not think we can discount aliens, UFO's, angels, spirits, etc. What looks like an angel to me may look like a grey to another. I do not think these visions/sightings or legends, at least on a whole, were embellishments and exaggerations made to impress someone, or sound grand. I think it is more than that I think they are true, at least to the one who witnessed the experience, and they were not trying to sound grand, but to understand what they had seen, so they were talked about, and eventually recorded. What we need to do is figure a way to decipher the history.
In thought, Leslee
Cater graduated from USC in 1948 with a BS in physics. He argued with his
professors about particles and planetary configurations and was discouraged
about a master's or anything more in terms of conventional, scientific
studies.
His book The Awesome Life Force was copyrighted in 1982, printed in '84, but
I can't really say much more about him. I've called him on the phone a few
times, and he'll talk with you, but he is short about things. He keeps
saying " well, it's in my book." And to tell the truth, the fellow is
getting older you know. It is getting to be time to just get things from his
books, although he can still explain and follow along, although sometimes
you have to remind him of the track of the conversation.
Lamprecht is a computer professional from South Africa, from a rural
background, who is vey much sstill active and around.
Dharma/Dean
astrocafe wrote:
I personally believe that the earth must be hollow, only because I do not
see how it could keep on spinning if it weren't. Not very scientific, but
that is my thought. I also think that the lands have changed over time, and
that there probably was an Atlantis, which could be known or referred to by
many names. I think that there, at one time, was a more perfect man than we
are today, and one reason alone is because our life span is what I consider
short compared to our technology. I do not think we can discount aliens,
UFO's, angels, spirits, etc. What looks like an angel to me may look like a
grey to another. I do not think these visions/sightings or legends, at
least on a whole, were embellishments and exaggerations made to impress
someone, or sound grand. I think it is more than that I think they are
true, at least to the one who witnessed the experience, and they were not
trying to sound grand, but to understand what they had seen, so they were
talked about, and eventually recorded. What we need to do is figure a way
to decipher the history.
Leslee, first I have heard that story about Brigham Young, but trust me I
know Patty Sessions great grandson (lives a mile away and is a good friend,
though older) and have flatly heard him deny those rumors. I also happen to
come from a non Mormon family who at the time of the martyrdom of Joseph
Smith were angry with the Moromons because they didn't do those things and
it impacted the sales that my great-great grandfather could have made
selling his Scotch Whiskey. That is in family journals of the time. He
admired the Mormons for living their religion, even though it cost him
money. Now I am a Latter Day Saint and can and will defend the church.
Anyway, on to the above quote. I too believe the Earth to be hollow. And
like I said, I have seen many things that I cannot explain. In fact, I have
been the beneficiary of some things that I would be ridiculed for if I were
to tell it publicly, but can prove to a point. I do believe in the little
people too. I however do not believe in Atlantis as the Greeks describe it.
It is my BELEIF, not a fact, that the Greeks were seeing something greater
than they knew and the exaggeration started and the next thing you know, you
have Atlantis as we know it today. However, I COULD BE WRONG.
Will "Argyll" Rhea
Leslee,
The health code (called the Word of Wisdom) of the LDS church does not stem
from Brigham Young announcing that there should be no more drinking or
smoking or partying. It originated with Joseph Smith, whose wife Emma grew
tired of wiping up spit tobacco from the church floor after meetings. She
thought it was disgusting and unbecoming of righteous men. Upon complaining
to Joseph, he inquired of the Lord and received a health code revelation
that not only describes tobacco, strong and hot drink as unhealthy, but also
advises us what to consume: fruit, grains, and all that is healthy. It even
discusses the consumption of meat. Indeed, the announcement was ahead of its
time, for no one knew that tobacco was harmful back then. At first it was a
mere guideline and has been open to interpretation. After all, what
constitutes "strong and hot" drink?
Over the past few decades, with the onset of drugs and increased tobacco and
alcohol use, this guideline has wisely become an enforced commandment, as it
pertains to tobacco, drugs, and alcohol. Breaking this commandment does not
strip a Mormon of his or her membership. All it does means is that in order
to be considered worthy enter into a temple (not a Sunday church building)
to perform certain ordinances, a person must abide this law.
Here's something you'll never hear a coward Christian, money grubbing
preacher say, but Joseph Smith was the first to say it:
"If we want to go to that place where God is, we must act like God."
Can it get any simpler? There are rules, both on earth and in heaven, and
it's foolish to pretend that Christ doesn't enforce them. To say that a
commandment came from a man and not God is inaccurate if that man was chosen
to be God's mouthpiece, because, clearly, that's how God has operated
throughout history.
Blake
H. Wm. Rhea III To wrote:
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://www.grisoft.com ).
Version: 6.0.250 / Virus Database: 123 - Release Date: 4/18/01
This is really going OT for this list, and I apologize in advance.
Here is the non-LDS Christian perspective on this same topic.
From
http://www.grmi.org/Richard_Riss/sermons/0008.html
During the time of the Reformation, one issue that was hotly
contested was whether a person is justified by faith or by works.
The Catholics emphasized James 2:24, which states that "a
man is justified by works, and not by faith alone," while the
Protestants responded with Galatians 2:16 and Romans 3:28,
according to which "a man is not justified by the works of the
Law but through faith."
Which is it? Are we justified by faith, as Paul says, or by
works, as James says? James was worried about people who
accepted Christian doctrine as true but who did not live
accordingly. He wrote that "even the demons believe and
shudder." Paul, on the other hand, was worried about those who
thought that if they followed the law, they would automatically
be acceptable to God. Of course, right standing before God
results neither from believing the right doctrines nor from going
through the right motions.
It's fine to perform good works, but that will not earn a
person right standing before God, since the Lord is not
interested merely in whether we engage in good deeds. He
wants to know why we are performing those deeds. Is it in order
to look good? Is it so that other people will think highly of us?
Is it in order to escape punishment? Do we engage in them so
that others will be indebted to us and we will therefore have a
measure of control over them?
------
More at the URL above. This URL also has some similar yet
worthwhile points:
http://www.calvaryem.org/dow/JUSTIFY.HTM
------
I believe that Paul said something to the effect of "All things in
moderation." Jesus "did away" with the dietary laws of the Old
Testament, and said essentially "Eat what you will, as long as
you do it with thanksgiving (to God)," which is the basis for the
Christian habit of "saying grace" or praying over a meal. In other
words, consecrate the food and drink in this way, and it will truly
by used to the nourishment of the body.
Jesus also said "You hypocrites. You criticized John the Baptist
when ate locusts and drank water from the wild, and you criticize
the son of man when he comes eating and drinking." "Drinking"
refers to alcoholic wine, not "grapejuice," as wine was made,
stored, and utilized daily in the middle east of the time, and
refrigeration was not an option to halt fermentation. The Jews
would not have halted fermentation anyway, wine was part of
their diet and culture, and of course Christ's first miracle was to
create a batch of "the good stuff" from water, for a wedding and at
his mother's request. Due to his habit of dining with the
common man, Christ was accused of being a drunkard and a
glutton (check the New Testament). He was neither, but this
was the source of his condemnation of his critics, as
paraphrased above. And of course, the Apostle Paul said "Take
a little wine daily, as it is good for the body."
So there you have the other side of the coin. "Works" and "rules"
don't guarantee anyone entrance to heaven, since all are
hopelessly imperfect. Only faith and acceptance of a "payment"
for our inadequacies (transgressions, sins, or "rule-breaking"),
in the form of the perfect sacrifice of the God-Man Christ, will do
the trick. Eating rules, drinking rules, etc. are meaningless
according to Christ, who enjoyed wine himself. What matters is
the inner intent and acceptance of Christ as Lord. That's the
general Protestant interpretation, as pretty clearly defined in
Scripture anyway.
A point which is to be noted is that, as a follower of Christ with
the Holy Spirit indwelling, one does not engage in drunkeness,
various addictions, etc., because it is not "God-like," as Blake
said. The overpowering urges and desires to do such things are
negated or removed by genuine faith.
--Mike
Will "Argyll" Rhea wrote:
<Leslee, first I have heard that story about Brigham Young, but trust me I know Patty Sessions great grandson (lives a mile away and is a good friend, though older) and have flatly heard him deny those rumors.>
Has he written the church for her official diaries? He is entitled to them if he can prove his lineage to her.
They are not rumors in the eyes of the church, but her official dairy kept for historical records on the church, and copies are only given out to relatives. I can not imagine the Mormon church giving out this history in diaries to relatives if they did not validate them first. According to the church her diary is an official document, and it dates begin Feb 10 , 1846. It tells of their complete journey to Salt Lake, and how the town was settled and built up. 9(But hey--let's take your view for a minute and day they are rumors--this is how discrepancies begin)
So, I am in no way criticizing you for your faith, just explaining what is written by Patty Bartlett, and also documented and confirmed by the Mormon church. I also do not want to get into an argument about religion, but was using the example to show how philosophies can be altered over time, rules made along the way, in anything historical.
<Now I am a Latter Day Saint and can and will defend the church.>
As you should. But, I am not asking that you defend the church. It does not need to be defended to me, nor does any other church or belief. As I said, it was used only as an example of how things get changed over time from original versions. It was not an assault on either you or the church, and if I came across that way I do humbly apologize.
<Anyway, on to the above quote. I too believe the Earth to be hollow. And like I said, I have seen many things that I cannot explain. In fact, I have been the beneficiary of some things that I would be ridiculed for if I were to tell it publicly, but can prove to a point.>
So, you are like those who walked before us and have seen glimpses of things others are blind too. This is what I was trying to say, many people have visions, dreams, sightings, and never speak of them because they know they will not be believed. Those who tell of their experiences are usually debunked by someone, or ridiculed which is really a shame.
But, those long ago brave souls who did not care about ridicule, are the ones responsible for the ancient texts that we today try to decipher. And, some of what has been written in the past hundred years, along with what will be written in the years to come, will also be studied and deciphered and gone over with the same kind of scrutiny people use today. We also we be a mystery to others and they will try to decide if a piece of information written in the year 2000 was true or false.
<I do believe in the little people too. I however do not believe in Atlantis as the Greeks describe it.>
I think there are may descriptions for Atlantis and it is hard to determine whose description is correct. That is why I suggested everything be looked at and evaluated.>
< It is my BELEIF, not a fact, that the Greeks were seeing something greater than they knew and the exaggeration started and the next thing you know, you have Atlantis as we know it today. However, I COULD BE WRONG.>
Then again, you could be right. Perhaps the Greeks were seeing something greater than they knew, and they told about it the best they could, but the story got lost in the translation. I think it is in the translations where the problems lie when trying to determine what is true.
In Peace, Leslee
Frei, Blake wrote:
Blake wrote;
"If we want to go to that place where God is, we must act like God."
Not disputing this at all. Leslee
Will "Argyll" Rhea wrote:
<Anyway, if you get the idea that I don't believe in Atlantis or LeMuria or
little or large grey aliens, you are right. I believe that many legends are myths that got started through embellishment and exaggeration. Although Ihave seen things that I can't explain and need no exaggeration or
embellishment to sound grand.>
Hi--
I have been following this thread. Interesting idea about myths. I, myself, believe that man throughout time has had visions--prophetic dreams, etc. And, I believe that if we were able to talk with the 'one' who had the vision we would probably be a lot more knowledgeable today then we are. But, a vision, even for the one experiencing it, is hard to decipher, as most come through in symbols. It is a bit like an abstract painting. If all of us in this group were to be shown a painting, and then asked for an interpretation, I would bet that there would be as many different interpretations as there were people on this list. Who would be right? Probably all of us would be able to see a hint of truth, but I doubt that any of us would be absolutely correct in describing what the artist intended. The artist may not even know.
But, lets take the Mormons for an example. I only select them because a very distant grandmother of mine was one--Patty Bartlett Sessions. I have her diary, which began with her walk across the states from the east coast to Salt Lake City with Brigham Young, her good friend. She was close to 50 at the time they made their travels west and lived to be 99. I have 45 years worth of her daily writing. Unfortunately, she was not a wordy woman, and her diary is a like reading a daily scientific log.
Her diary is revealing in how religions/myths/doctrines change over time. For instance, she talks about the Saturday night get-togethers, and yes, liquor was served and cigarettes smoked. She talks about how they healed so and so while laying on hands. How they talked in tongues. What psychic visions they had...etc. Now, today, we know that the Mormon's do not indulge in either alcohol or tobacco. How did this become a rule? Well, according to her dairy Brigham Young rose to the pulpit one Sunday morning after a long Saturday night and could barely see his parishioners due to the smoky church--and he was not feeling too well after a night of partying, therefore in a cranky mood--so, right then and there he made a new Mormon Rule--forbidding alcohol & cigarettes. I do not know much about the Mormon religion today, as I am not Mormon, but my mom and dad's parents were. And, I know that if the above rule was broken, then a Mormon was forbidden to go through the Temple in Salt Lake City. I know because it happened to my mom's mom. This rule came from a man, not a God. A preacher who became legend. I only use this as an example for "how" legends become altered only because it is the only one I have written proof of.
I can also read her dairy and see how over the years there were many changes in the Mormon beliefs. And, since we are all human, I would bet that this has happened with every religion ever born. Or prophecy. Little changes over time that in the end add up to huge discrepancies. Add in the fact that many of the original books were burned for one reason or another, those left may have been written in code, or tampered with, or translated by a third, fourth or fifth party. In light of how history has been recorded through time I would say practically anything could be true, or not true. But, I would bet that there is some truth in every myth or prophecy or religion if we dig deep enough and piece together the puzzle. I have often wondered if religions are different from one another only because they were written for different cultures, yet if we looked hard enough we may discover they are pretty much based on the same principles? Some are more romantic than others, some crude, others down right scary, and maybe it is all because of the artist who wrote it, or the translator's style of dialect. I think all the books hold clues to the mystery of this planet and it's evolution, and what may still come.
I personally believe that the earth must be hollow, only because I do not see how it could keep on spinning if it weren't. Not very scientific, but that is my thought. I also think that the lands have changed over time, and that there probably was an Atlantis, which could be known or referred to by many names. I think that there, at one time, was a more perfect man than we are today, and one reason alone is because our life span is what I consider short compared to our technology. I do not think we can discount aliens, UFO's, angels, spirits, etc. What looks like an angel to me may look like a grey to another. I do not think these visions/sightings or legends, at least on a whole, were embellishments and exaggerations made to impress someone, or sound grand. I think it is more than that I think they are true, at least to the one who witnessed the experience, and they were not trying to sound grand, but to understand what they had seen, so they were talked about, and eventually recorded. What we need to do is figure a way to decipher the history.
In thought, Leslee
You must taste the Essence of Wisdom....NOW...I spoke therefore it is.....
Yes!Alpha/Omega(GOD) does have many instruments,and mouthpieces...The humans
you least expect....What if Love is a Key?