Energy Flow
Thu Mar 6, 2008 3:05 pm
John C:
"I am just trying to say I have some knowledge though the soul and you
have some knowledge though the soul, so how come they don't agree?
How can we bridge the communication and knowledge gap so we can
arrive at something we both feel good about? I can't deny the God
within, but I can't ask you to deny that same God either. After all,
it is the same God in each of us, so why are we not seeing eye to eye?"
JJ:
There are a number of possibilities here which are:
- We really agree but there is a miscommunication, which makes it
look otherwise. (This is very common among seekers).
- Neither of us received accurate soul contact on this issue.
- Only one of us has accurate contact.
- Both of us has but one or both are interpreting what we received
incorrectly or with prejudice.
John C:
"We (John & Thom) have an emotional, mental, and spiritual
connection which is incredible."
JJ:
I accept this. It is quite possible you two have had many
relationships in the past, which could include husband/wife,
parent/child, teacher/disciple, etc. Positive relationships of the
past can result in very close relationships in the present
irregardless of sex. I felt close to my good friend, Wayne, who has
passed, and look forward to meeting him again. I also look forward
to meeting Artie again whether it be as the same or different sex.
John C:
"I think you can appreciate the learning phases which our souls took
us each through before we met, and after we got together. They are
basically what you discussed, only as a same sex couple. I have
learned that energy follows thought, but thought cannot continually
chase after energy."
JJ:
Thought does not chase after energy, but is influenced by it.
Gravity is an energy which influences us and even though energy
follows thought, thought does not reverse gravity -- at least not
thought in our state of evolution. On the other hand, gravity
influences our thoughts and habits every minute. For instance I just
placed my coffee cup in a secure location on my desk rather than
trying to float it in mid air.
John C:
"You speak of this as a simple change of habit. It's a lot more
difficult to change a habit, when it is more than a 'habit.' I tried
to change a 'habit' for 13 years, and through the birth of four
children, but that 'habit' just wouldn't go away."
JJ:
Nothing to disagree with so far. Let me clarify. I didn't say that
being gay is a habit, but that we carry over from one life to the
next various habits and attachments. This applies to all whether gay
or straight.
If a gay person seeks to change his sexual orientation, and he is
near the zero point, it will be more difficult than changing a habit
like quitting smoking. When you quit smoking for a time you
eventually eliminate most of the nicotine from your system and the
desire for a cigarette changes considerably.
The problem for the gay person is if he forces his orientation to
change the latent energy and desire remains unchanged. There is no
nicotine to get out of his system to make a permanent change easier.
If one is born near the zero point with close to a zero charge then
he will carry over thoughtforms and some desires from the previous
life. He will not be able to will himself to be attracted to the
opposite sex because his new charge is not strong enough. Those who
are not familiar with these teachings will either just accept their
same sex attraction or fight it with some confusion and frustration
the rest of their lives.
No matter what he does change is coming and if he has made a
switchover from one sex to another that energy will increase and
eventually the person will sense it and go with it. By the second
lifetime after the switchover the energy becomes strong enough to
identify with. There are exceptions of course.
I have always advised gays to search within and sense which direction
the energy is shifting. He must ask if he is moving toward a greater
female or male charge. The answer is always one or the other for no
one stands still in this changing universe.
John C:
"But, you are saying that gay's can't have contact with the higher
impressions of the soul?"
JJ:
WOW! Where did you get that? I have said the opposite. I have said
the gay person is closer to the zero point and actually has a less
distracted access provided he is true to his soul.
John C:
"But, it is beyond devastating to learn that we as a unit, just as we
are, brought together and kept together by the Spirit, have to dilute
the sacred energies which we share by changing our relationship by
adding somebody else so that it is acceptable to you."
JJ:
You are doing this now and I doubt that it dilutes anything. I
assume you have associates at work that you labor with. Doe this
dilute your relationship with Thom?
In the molecule I will work with people besides my wife and gays will
work with people besides their partners for the purpose of making it
work. This will be similar to you working with an associate to make
a piece of software work.
You seem to see that working with anyone besides Thom would be a loss
but we will all have to work with others in the real world.
A battery cannot work without the correct use of the two polarities.
Male and female are two polarities that must be considered to create
the correct energy flow. This energy flow has nothing to do with
soul contact. Soul contact merely allows one to see the principle.
Let us suppose you and Thom were in a molecule together and were in
the same Triad of three males and three females. You and Thom could
still get your heads together and share ideas as much as ever, but
the other four people would also need to be included in their proper
place. The Molecule is a place of spiritual labor, not a romantic
situation. Intimate communication with romantic interests should be
done outside of the molecule.
John C:
"The kind of energies I would be expected to share between me and my
'working [female] partner,' would be the same energies that I now
share with Thom."
JJ:
I would hope not. It should be more on the level that you now share
with associates in your current work.
John C:
"But, that is not acceptable to us. A relationship is nothing more or
less than the agreements and the energies which flow between the
members of the relationship. Adding a 'working partner' would be
tantamount to changing our relationship or breaking it up, and as I
said, we were told that the key to our success was to stick together
as a couple."
JJ:
You seem to be looking at the Molecule as a place to have intimate
emotional interplay. That is not its purpose. The spiritual energy
a working molecule will draw down will be completely inclusive and
there will be no sense of loss connected with it for all will have an
equal share. Your joy with various members will be the same as with
your partner.
John C:
"I don't have to ask whether or not we can enter the Kingdom of God.
The only think I want to know is whether YOU think we can enter the
Kingdom of God, and whether others here feel the same."
JJ:
Anyone who follows his soul will enter the kingdom of God.
John C:
"It wouldn't be the Kingdom of God unless all who are prepared to
enter it are accepted without reservations by all other members. It
also wouldn't be the Kingdom of God unless all have soul contact, and
where everyone can see eye-to-eye, where the inner God speaks with
the same voice to one and all."
JJ:
There is one criteria for membership in a molecule and that is soul
contact and that others feel that contact in each other. Once this
is done there should be complete acceptance of each other on a soul
level, even though there will be differences of opinion in areas
where the soul has not spoken to the group.
John C:
"True, but why am I put in a position where I have to justify to the
rest of you that I in fact know what I know, and am just as entitled
to a place in the kingdom as the rest of you?"
JJ:
I do not think you are in that position. I don't see anyone
demanding you to justify anything. Some will disagree with you on
certain items, but they disagree with me much more often than with
you and I feel no need to justify myself. People can take or leave
me. I care not.
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
-- Ken Olson, President of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977
Copyright © 2008 by JJ Dewey, All Rights Reserved
|