Conference hydra::dejavu

    Alice,
    
      What did she say about Jesus? 
    
    Gil (with a personal name like mine, I just gotta ask.)

    Gil,
    
    I asked about Jesus because I understand him to be a highly evolved
    soul who dht his message for us on earth.  She agreed with that and said
    always to thank the Father, The Mother, The Son and the Holy Spirit
    for any blessings we receive. 

    
    re.3
    
        Just my humble knowing and take it for what you like.
     The Holy Ghost is the Mother,The creative aspect of God.
     Hense the trinity is not a square, still three!
     Common sense tells me that a masculine force cannot create a son
     with out a feminine force. So the great mystery is solved....
    
                                      HH

Good Afternoon,

The Catholic Church is the institution that did away with acknowledging
the "Feminine Aspect" of the Creative Force and masculinized the "Trinity"
in the Christian faith.

"God" as you call the White Fire Core is a duality and therefore balanced
and complete. Father is the Creative spark, Mother is the manifestation in
form....therefore, when Father (creative spark) and Mother (manifestation
in form) come together in the Holy Spirit, the Son (sun) is created or
Christ Consciousness in the Heart.   

That is why the Catholic crossing of the body seems incomplete now.....
it should be Father at the head (crown chakra) and then Mother at the 
base chakra..Holy Spirit at the left shoulder and Son at the right
shoulder.....vertical part of cross (spirit)...horizontal part of cross
(manifested in the earth/form).

You cannot ascend without raising the Mother flame from the base of the
spine...that was one of the things Jesus taught his disciples.

Light from the Father comes in through Crown Chakra, Light from the Mother
(flame) is raised from the base chakra to create the Son (sun) in the 
Heart chakra.....without this one can not ascend.

In Light and Love 
I AM,
Altraea

    Altraea,
    
     Thank you for your answers.
    
    Where did Jesus teach His disciples about the "mother" fire? I have been
    studying the 4 gospels of the new testament for years and have never
    come across a reference to this. Is this contained in apocryphal or
    pseudopocryphal writings?
    
    You mentioned 3 chakras (crown/father, base of spine/mother,
    heart/son). Aren't there 7 chakras? Where do the 4 others fit in with
    chakra/trinity? How does this compare to khundalini (sp) chakras
    mentioned here in other topics?
    
    Thanks in advance for your answers,
    
    Gil         

    Re: .6

>    You mentioned 3 chakras (crown/father, base of spine/mother,
>    heart/son). Aren't there 7 chakras? Where do the 4 others fit in with

    As far as that goes there are reportedly many more than seven - it's
    just that those are the major ones. Perhaps those three are also
    relatively more important in the group of seven.
    
John D.

    The Catholic Church created the Mother (Our Lady) on the 12th Century.
    Up to then there was only a Christ. With that they probablie made
    the first advertisement related modification ever, so common in
    today's corporations. The reason they did that was to get acceptance
    from the cultures where the Mother (like Mother Earth or Mother
    Nature - still in use in the English language - ) was celebrated.
    
    Not everything that exists needed to be created or be born. That's
    a limited concept of 3 dimensions. The Universe wasn't created.
    The Universe will never end. It's form may change though.
    
    God, Sun and Holy Spirit are enough. If you include a Mother (or
    a 4th energy) you don't know what you are talking about. Names are
    just names to make regular people understand complex subjects.
    The three major energies in our universe are the Matter, the
    Anti-Matter and the energy created by those two opposites. Just
    call it what ever you want but don't add a fourth that doesn't fit.
    This is where the magic number 3 comes from.  Two other magic number
    were celebrated in different cultures: the 4 and the 7. The 4 is
    the four elements around us: Fire,Water, Air, dirt. The 7 is 4+3
    together: The three energies and the four elements together. This
    is refered by us as Universe.
    Today's Religions like New Age are just using the old concepts and
    give them a different meaning making it attractive to the tech age
    person in a low tech world.
    
    
    In Knowledge I Am  
    
    Rui
    
    An European with multiple personalities. Next Friday I will be a
    Walkout (of DEC ..... of course).
                               

    Rui,
    
    Mary was `rated' below Jesus and the Magi until the 6th century.
    By the 9th century, she held the position of Queen of Heaven in
    (at least) two cathedrals.  So this process was completed some
    three centuries before your information said it had even begun.
    
    The Lady of pagan religions is known as the Triple Goddess, taking
    the three roles of Maiden, Matron, and Crone.  The addition of the
    Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son to form a Triple is seen by
    some as an attempt by Christianity to imitate and then supplant
    the Goddess-based beliefs.  Then, as you said, they added in the
    Mother image to gain acceptance from those who would not accept a
    masculine substitute.
    
    						Ann B.

    ... and a female aspect to God has been a part of the Judaic tradition
    on which Christianity is based since well before the beginning of the
    Christian era.  It is this which has justified the inclusion in
    scripture of what by all appearances are a series of fairly explicit
    and carnal love poems (The Songs of Solomon).  They are interpretted
    as alegories of the devotion of the writer to the Godhead in its
    feminine form.
    
    					Topher

     Mary was created in the 12th century (sorry I don't have dates
    with me) as the Virgen or the Mother of all. Slow as the Christians
    are to to make a change means that the process may have started a few 
    century's before. But Mary was all the time known as the mother of Chist.
    She was not known as our Mother though. A church from the 6th century
    that I've visited show's Mary figures together with others, but
    never alone.
    
    Christianity didn't start from the Judaic tradition alone. It actually
    started from 3 different religions, one of them being gay oriented,
    where the masculinity of God comes from. All cultures were based
    on the Mother and the Father, the easy answer to how did we got
    here. Even the Greek and Roman cultures had that same need. Even
    today most of the people can not understand that same logic. The
    Father was most of the times refered to as the Sun, the Mother was
    most of the times refered to as the Earth. After thousands of years
    of evolution some groups are still going after the Sun and the Earth
    as the solution for their religion needs. Where are we going?
    
    Topher, actually that was in Asia a female religious leader 4 or 5 thousand
    years before Christ. But I think that was when the world was living
    on the female dominated world phase. The need for a Mother on the
    male oriented world can be explained with the pure love a male has
    for it's own mother and the need he have to keep it alive after she
    dies. Both can give him the love no other woman can give. I accept
    any explanation for the Mother and Father concepts, except the one's
    that use buzz words that are a discussion on it self.
    

    In party I am
    
    Rui

    
    
    As a recent perspective,Mary has a very special position in heaven. She
    frequently accompanies Jesus in the spirit world,in their ongoing work
    there. Many of the spirits I communicate with,mention this.
    
    Peace
    Michael
    
    

RE: .11
    
    Christianity started from Judaism -- it *was* and considered itself
    a *form* of Judaism for several centuries.  To a large extent it is
    still a form of Judaism -- though pretty far off from either the broad
    mainstream at the time of its development or from that other branch
    of Judaic tradition which retains the name (but what do you expect from
    2000 years of divergent development).  It formed at a time when Judaism
    was absorbing and attempting to reconcile ideas from a number of
    sources -- especially Helinistic ones.  Judaism had already absorbed
    some traditions -- formallized to various degrees in the different
    varieties of Judaism than extant -- from its Babylonian exile (some of
    these ideas form a more prominant part in Christianity, both early
    and modern, than they do in Rabinical Judaism).  Later, Christianity
    absorbed and transmuted many other influences, but what it had at its
    birth were influences that acted on the whole of Judaism, and which
    changed Judaism as much as they influenced Christianity.
    
    Christianity started with the idea of a female aspect to God.  The
    trinity was formallized *later*, but the "holy spirit" concept grew out
    of that feminine aspect, and in the early days of Trintism was often
    described as feminine.  The cult of Mary was a *reintroduction* of
    the female aspect of godhead as part of the general concept of saints
    which evolved from the Jewish tradition of prophets and from the
    essentially social/political concept of martyrs.
    
    Christianity needed to look no further than Judaism for the ascendency
    of the masculine aspect of god.  Judaism had, after all, evolved the
    concept of a single God (originally one god among others but ascendent
    over them) from a masculine Storm God.  Few branches of Judaism treated
    the female aspect as anything but a *secondary* aspect (i.e., a less
    preferred way for God to manifest on Earth and/or to his/her
    worshippers).  I frankly fail to see the reasoning behind the idea that
    a "gay-oriented" religion, as opposed to a misogynistic one, would be
    particularly prone to a father-god.  What religion is this, and what
    evidence is there that it was actually "gay-oriented"?
    
    There is a middle eastern tradition, which has had wide influence on
    European culture for a long, long time, which makes the Sun masculine
    and the Earth or the Sky feminine.  But, contrary to what some would
    claim, this is not at all universal.  Each of the Sun, the Moon, the
    Sky and the Earth have different sexes in different traditions.  If
    there is any tendency at all, it is to identify the *sky* (Ouranous in
    Greek mythology) as masculine and the earth (Gea) as feminine.  This is
    powerfully suggested to agricultural cultures by metaphors of
    rain/sperm and the soil as womb.  Even so, there are many exceptions.
    
    Where are we going?  Nowhere -- where did you get the idea that
    religious ideas evolve toward some absolute goal; presumably
    representing TRUTH.  This is an illusion caused by imposing external
    organizing principles designed to place oneself closer to the TRUTH
    than those who have come before.  Older ideas are no more or less
    likely to be true than newer ones -- the newer ones simply fit the
    culture of the more recent adherents better.
    
    There have been many female religious leaders throughout history, I'm
    not sure what significance you attach to one of them.  You may believe,
    if you wish, that there was a point in time "when the world was living
    on the female dominated world phase."  Many people do, and they may be
    right.  But there is absolutly no evidence that this was true, only
    that at various times, in various places, females were worshipped
    (though perhaps males were also).
    
    Correct me if I'm wrong (it does happen occasionally :-) but it sounds
    to me like what you are saying in your last sentence is that you will
    accept any explanation as long as it supports the lack of any real
    spiritual significance to the male/female dichotomy (which you assume,
    following Freud, to be actually limited to the Mother/Father dichotomy).
    
    					Topher

    Topher, I accept your ideas because they bring something to the
    discussion. I may agree or may not agree. I would not accept ideas 
    like in .5 because they are the official opinion of a religion or
    a religious group.
    
    When you refer to Judaism you are refering to a religion as we know
    it today which is associated to a race. Unfortunally I don't have
    the names of the religions that followed Christ, or even dates,
    and I will be out of here in 1 week. But if I find some data related
    until then I will post it here.
    
    Rui

Good afternoon Gil,

It is mentioned in the Tibetan scrolls that give an accounting of "Issa"
(Jesus)....Not all pertinent information about Jesus and his teachings
are contained in the Bible....many books have been removed by the 
Catholic church

All of the chakras are important..and there are many more than 7.
However, there are 7 major ones....the three I mentioned had the most 
to do with the explanation I was giving you at the time...Kundalini
is the Mother Flame!

Namasthe,
Altraea

    I am not sure what you mean by "accept" as opposed to "agree", but
    reject an idea because of its source is irrational.  It is a
    metaphysical and essentially religious belief to reject that there
    are spiritual truths (notice I did not say that it was an incorrect
    one).  The belief system that holds that the only truth is that which
    can be proven objectively is self-contradictory (notice, once again
    that I did not say that it was an incorrect belief system).
    
    There are forums where discussion of spiritual/subjective beliefs are
    inappropriate.  This conference is not one of them -- it exists in part
    to discuss such beliefs.  It is reasonable to point out that the a
    belief is subjective rather than objective.  It is reasonable to point
    out that a stated subjective (or even objective) belief is in conflict
    with your objective beliefs.  And it is reasonable to point out (as
    I am doing) that assertions of the preeminance of a particular set of
    beliefs are not particularly appropriate in this context -- even if
    I in large part share those beliefs.  This is not a conference devoted
    exclusively to scientific truth.
    
    What little meaning the term "race" has does not apply to the Jewish
    people.  Most Jews are caucasians, although a large contingent of
    black, Ethiopian Jews -- tracing their descent from Solomon and the
    Queen of Sheeba -- have emigrated to Israel, raising large amounts of
    social, political and religious havoc.  Like many religions
    classically, Judaism is, however, associated with a particular ethnic
    group.  Initially, Christianity was associated with and largely
    restricted to the same ethnic group.  Keep in mind that for a long
    time, before one could convert to Chritianity, one first had to convert
    to Judaism.
    
    Are you thinking of Mithraism, perhaps?  One or more of the Gnostic
    sects?  The Essenes (without question a branch of Judaism)? 
    Zorastroism?  These are prominant among the many religious movements
    which influenced the early development of that branch of Judaism which
    became known as Christianity.
    
    						Topher

<<        one).  The belief system that holds that the only truth is that which
<<    can be proven objectively is self-contradictory (notice, once again
<<    that I did not say that it was an incorrect belief system).

  	I agree with you. I was just trying to come out with a rational
    	explanation for Mary and the Mother and Father. I do beleive
    	in God, but I'm trying to understand It, not creating it at
    	my own image.
    
    	I used the term "race" for lack of a better term. Not all Jews
    	follow Judaism, and not all of the one's that follow Judaism
    	are Jews regarding it's background. I used the term "race" to
    	define people that lived 2000 years a go in the area today known
    	as Israel and it's descendents. I'm a combination of Jew, Arab,
    	Roman, German and who knows what. But my family stoped following
    	Judaism 400 years a go or so. I still can relate to the Jews people
    	as a race, can't I?
    
    	Topher, I simple don't accept beliefs that use buzz words to
    	explain itself. You have to accept the buzz words as a belief
    	to accept the belief itself. I considerer that as brain wash.
    	It doesn't matter if is a religion, spiritual group or a political
    	party. 
    
    	I have a Christian background and my relation with that religion
    	have marked me. Everything they did in the past has no excuse.
    	You see today what conservative Jews are doing using about the
    	same excuse others did on their race. Religion and Governement
    	have been working together for ages. I know there are other
    	religions, but they are too small to make an impact on the
    	society. If they were big enough they would!
                                             
    	About the creation of the Catolic Curch I hope I get something
    	done before I leave DEC.
    
    	Has been a pleasure,
    
    	Rui
                                                                        

                                  
    There is a wonderful book out entitled "The Chalice and The Blade" by
    Riane Eisler which talks about the partnership model as opposed to
    either a male or a female-dominated past.
    
    Eisler did a tremendous amount of research and managed to shed some 
    different light onto what we have been brought up with as 'what really 
    happened'.  From that information she then presents a model we could
    use in the world today where we effectively become partners and work
    together in peace as equals.  Fascinating reading.
    
    Cindy