- Prediction Results 2011
- After New Hampshire
- Ron Paul’s 2002 Predictions
- A Call to Repentance
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 1
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 2
- Inelia Benz
- Alternative Universes
- The Problem with Infinite Individual Realities
- Soul Mates
- The Vegetarian Diet
- Animal Destiny
- The True Left
- Principles of Unification
- Gathering of Lights 2012
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 3
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 4
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 5
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 6
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 7
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 8
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 9
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 10
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 11
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 12
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 13
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 14
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 15
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 16
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 17
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 18
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 19
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 20
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 21
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 22
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 23
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 25
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 24
- Avatar of Synthesis
- Keys Posts 2012, Part 25
June 14, 2012
Question on the fate of the universe
Tom When you say God has to let the old universe go…does that mean it will all go back to a point known as the BIG CRUNCH? and no longer expand, but come back on itself and die out…then GOD creates a new universe?
JJ Essentially, yes. The universe will eventually die and matter will return to spirit for billions of years of pralaya. Then a new universe will be born slightly more complex than this one.
June 16, 2012
Rehash of DK?
Ruth: No I do not agree that much of what JJ teaches is a rehash of DK and others.
JJ I’m glad you see it that way because I have gone out of my way to insure that the teachings I present are not a rehash or merely a rewording of something already presented. I think Larry realizes this and if his point is that many of the components of my teachings have been presented in some form in the past then this is true to a degree. However, probably the only thing I have taught that could be considered a real rehash would be my classes on White Magic which did indeed elaborate on DK’s book.
On the other hand, most of my teachings either present new material or new light on old principles. For instance, the Keys of Knowledge presented in the Immortal series along with other teachings there are not found anywhere else. Then no one wrote about the Molecular Relationship before me. In fact I had to invent the phrase to even intelligently talk about it.
In the Gathering of lights I present the gathering as a principle behind evolution, something no one did before me that I know of.
I was the first, about 40 years ago, to write a whole book proving reincarnation from the scriptures. Since then many others have used my ideas and references.
The Gods of the Bible presents the idea that man and God are one with a thoroughness from the Bible and the Hebrew in a way that has not been done before.
My new book, The Unveiling, gives a totally different interpretation of Revelation that nothing else out there even resembles.
Then, if you go through the archives and pick any article the chances are you will find no other teacher, past or present, saying the same thing. I might add though sometimes I have explained esoteric teachings of the past for the purpose of bringing students up to speed with concepts often discussed in metaphysical circles. These could be considered a rehash though there are not a lot of posts dealing with this.
As far as facts that are used in many of my writings – yes many of them are used by others and where pertinent I reference where they came from. but facts are much different than a picture painted though the grouping of many facts and ideas. Einstein used many facts readily available when he presented the theory of Relativity, but that did not diminish the value of the new picture he presented.
June 26, 2012
Negating the Beast
Maryellen: Aren’t we all sick of hearing how this one channels Seth or Ramtha or whoever? I got SO sick of hearing everyone say they were channeling someone, it brought me to a place where I couldn’t read another channeled book. Then suddenly JJ’s first book just appeared on my computer screen and I’ve been here ever since.
JJ Fist let me note that I took some time off after the gathering but am now back. We had a great gathering and another fine group of people.
Have you noticed, as Maryellen has, that most of the spiritual teachers of this generation have called upon the authority of the Beast to support their words? Here are some of the ways:
(1) I am channeling this great entity therefore you need to believe my words because they are not mine but are from a Master or great Spirit.
(2) I am the reincarnation of ___ therefore if you reject me you would have rejected ___. You need to believe me without question.
(3) I have been visited by the great being who is ____. Therefore you need to believe me or you will be cursed.
More could probably be listed, but you get the idea.
One of my most important missions is to expose the source and power of the Beast and the means to destroy it. Therefore, the fewer claims I make the better for it gives readers the complete freedom to reject anything I say and not have any guilt from the possibility of offending God or some great being.
Many there are who have merely done a good job of creating writing and claimed to channel someone who was a figment of their imagination or lay claim to an experience that never happened. The writings of The Teaching of the Masters of the Far East is one example. It is said that Spaulding never even wet to India but had a good knowledge of metaphysical principles and wrote them in story form – but instead of stating they were fiction he published them as a true account. This has happened many times and it causes numerous seekers to not question any of the teachings – some of which are not true.
Jesus said the path to the Kingdom of God is narrow and few there be that find it. Few find it because they are distracted by the need for the authority of the Beast. Many want to know for sure if my account of John is 100% true or false so they can either cling to him as a Beast or seek another Beast.
As it is, the acceptance of all the teachings through me are left up to the readers own soul. Progress is slow at present for “few” can handle this path but the numbers will grow during the Aquarian Age.
June 27, 2012
Re: Negating the Beast
Dean: Well as Ruth references you have said you are the reincarnation of a friend of john, of someone planning Hitler’s assassination.
JJ Stauffenberg was not a person of any spiritual authority and a virtual historical unknown when I made mention of him.
Dean: In your books you make reference to people in the past who you were a reincarnation of that did significant things.
JJ This was in a book of fiction with no authority attached and no historical figure that I was a reincarnation of was even named.
Dean: You have wrote in your book how a great entity of light went into your body and overshadowed you.
JJ Again, this was in a book labeled fiction with no authority attached. It may or may not be true.
Dean: That all the dark forces were attacking you. All this people on the list from reading your book, have taken this all seriously. I can tell by reading the posts.
JJ So dark forces attacking you makes you a beastly figure? Wow. A number of people on the list have recounted a number of attacks. Do you view them the same way???
Dean: And you claiming that you are the disciple of john in your book.
JJ You’re making things up. I make no such claim. Making a statement in a fiction book is not making any claim. The only claim is the actual teachings are true as far as my ability to discern and teach it is concerned.
Dean: I don’t think you are that much different in this way JJ. To the others claiming something. Like at our number 3. lol.
JJ I doubt if anyone but you will be stretching his imagination that much to make such a wild connection.
We covered this subject thoroughly in the past and I do not like to repeat myself so I do not know why you keep bring up your grudge on the way I have presented teachings in the Immortal books. Your grudge is duly noted and yet I proceed on the highest I know.
June 29, 2012
Fabulous if True
Maryellen: This is SO fabulous if true! And what a great example of the means justifying the end! Hats off to Roberts!!!!!!!
Interesting point of view. Worth the time to read.
JJ It’s not as promising as the article says. He writes:
“His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional. As it should be. Next, he stated that, because Congress doesn’t have the ability to mandate, it must, to fund Obama-care, rely on its power to tax.”
Justice Roberts stated that the Court does not have power to mandate but the Court actually gave no ruling related to this or the Commerce Clause meaning that the whole matter could come up again on this or another illusion.
June 30, 2012
Francine writes: The professor of a university challenged his students with this question. “Did God create everything that exists?”
A student answered bravely, “Yes, he did”.
The professor then asked, “If God created everything, then he created evil. Since evil exists (as noticed by our own actions), so God is evil. The student couldn’t respond to that statement causing the professor to conclude that he had “proved” that “belief in God” was a fairy tale, and therefore worthless.
Another student raised his hand and asked the professor, “May I pose a question? ” “Of course” answered the professor.
The young student stood up and asked: “Professor does Cold exists?” The professor answered, “What kind of question is that?…Of course the cold exists… haven’t you ever been cold?”
The young student answered, “In fact sir, Cold does not exist. According to the laws of Physics, what we consider cold, in fact is the absence of heat. Anything is able to be studied as long as it transmits energy (heat). Absolute Zero is the total absence of heat, but cold does not exist. What we have done is create a term to describe how we feel if we don’t have body heat or we are not hot.”
“And, does Dark exist?” he continued. The professor answered “Of course”.
This time the student responded, “Again you’re wrong, Sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in fact simply the absence of light. Light can be studied, darkness can not. Darkness cannot be broken down. A simple ray of light tears the darkness and illuminates the surface where the light beam finishes. Dark is a term that we humans have created to describe what happens when there’s lack of light.”
Finally, the student asked the professor, “Sir, does evil exist?” The professor replied, “Of course it exists, as I mentioned at the beginning, we see violations, crimes and violence anywhere in the world, and those things are evil.”
The student responded, “Sir, Evil does not exist. Just as in the previous cases, Evil is a term which man has created to describe the result of the absence of God’s presence in the hearts of man.
After this, the professor bowed down his head, and didn’t answer back.
The young man’s name was Albert Einstein.
JJ I thought this didn’t sound like Einstein talking so I checked it out and it appears to be a creative story merely attributed to Einstein in 2004. Here is a good article on it: http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/religion/a/einstein_god.htm
The article nevertheless does contain some good points for consideration.
(You do not have to log in to add comments)
JJ’s Amazon page HERE