Messages

[EVERYTHING]

Adam,

I don't speak man but I'll try here to communicate some meaning to you [].

I don't think belief in God is necessary for personal growth to occour.  I believe (there goes that word again) that you are correct in stating that the belief system holds one back from growing.  I think that God can be summed up like this.

God = Energy (the stuff of everything, EVERYTHING in the Universe.)

It is not necessary to believe in energy in order to benefit from its properties.  We would not have light, electricity, the movement of the planets, affection, radio, thoughts, bodies, the ocean, the earth, anything without energy.  

One does not need to believe in the thing called cell phone in order to enjoy the benefits of talking to your mother who lives several hundred (or thousand) miles away. Think about it, even the most inanimate objects, take rocks for example are bursting with energy.  If you were a molecule that lived inside a rock, from your perspective, things would be bzzing around you and moving all over the place, you would not see your environment as inanimate, you would see the rock as buzzing with energy, the molecules are just more dense than those molecules in your body... all of it different vibrations of energy.

Alas, this too is a Belief... so I'm most likely still holding myself back.

So, the natural conclusion I draw from this is that if God=Energy and we we are part of that energy, part of what makes up everything, we must also all be made up of God (but then I cross the threshold into theology.)

Love,
Kerri

Palehorse,

Many of the people who attend my church are Reiki practitioners, myself included.  Go look under the Healing forum for a testimonial of Majour Ka to some Reiki healing that myself and a friend from my church sent his way.  I think it is under the heading, "Has anyone ever been healed?"

They have talked about the teachings of Ghandi, they have talked about Intention and the power of the mind, they have talked about Chaos and Community, about Homosexuality, and different interpretations of how it is viewed and they talk about the Christ Consciousness that we all have access to.

Basically, the message they all teach is that we are all God, expressed individually and the only difference between us and Christ is that He KNEW WHO HE WAS, that his TEACHINGS are the WAY... not he himself as an idol or someone to be worshoped but His way is life as being a path to God... Oh.. they also teach that there are many paths and they honor the development process of each individual person because even though we may be walking along the same path, we will not walk at the same time or follow the same path step for step as anyone else, we are all unique and all paths lead to God.

I hope this helps,
Kerri

I'm visiting my mother as I write this because my Grandmother died on Friday.  I am not one of those people who is very good at consoling prople because I don't believe in "death" as we know it.  I see it as a shift in consciousness and sort of a "homecoming."  Someone here has a signature that says something like "Death is the best High, that's why we save it for last." and I believe this to be true.  

That said, I do believe that I have things that I came here to accomplish and want to accomplish those things before my physical "death," so I choose to remain until those goals have been realized.

Kerri

[all]

I think this is the same as the Unity Church, it is also the church I attend.  The message Unity teaches is that we all are divine beings... period.  It teaches messages that are designed to awaken the Christ Consciousness within each of us.  It is a church but It is not really a religion as we understand religions... it is more like a spiritual movement.  it encourages people to find their own path to Christ Consciousness within its teachings.  Here's the one I attend. www.unitylife.org there is also an association of Unity Churches which I think is at www.unity.org.

Kerri

quote:Originally posted by Robert Bruce Baird

Dear T

The assertions you arrogantly make in questioning my approach are mitigated by your own admission I am right.

Ahem...

Who's the one being arrogant?

K

Throughout history, ALL religions have taken bits and pieces of the preexisting ones in order to get buy in from the people who practiced these religions.  After successfully brainwashing people, they would then destroy the preexisting temples and place their own on those very same spots.  The church is not STUPID!  They are cunning and manipulative but not STUPID!  They knew than as they know now that in order to make a new religion more paletable to people, they needed to incorporate some of the old into the new.  

Narrow Fundimentalist thinking (of any kind) disallows any free thought and is an example of the exact brainwashing that the church was out to accomplish and they are good at it in some cases. Woo Hoo!!! They've got that brainwashing technique down!!!  And still they are repressing free thinking because so many people believe that the myths the church spoon feeds them is the ABSOLUTE truth. They also believe that if one thinks for themselves, it is the work of the DEVIL[}:)]. Fundimentalist thinking proclaims,"What I say is right, I have all the answers because it's in MY spiritual text and since you disagree with me, you are going to hell!"  What horsesh*t!!!  Oh and by the way, That is the definition of self Righteousness --- which is a sin... To proclaim to have all the answers and only your answers are right.  If you proclaim to not have all the answers you are at least still open to new ideas and learning... ever evolving.  It's when you claim to have all the answers that you stop growing.

OF COURSE Christianity is based on other preexisting religions.  I have heard the Therory that Jarthur stated:

quote:Catholicism has a suprising number of similarities to the Sun worship religion.

"Long before the advent of Jesus, Mithra was said to have been born of a virgin mother, in a cave, at the time of Christmas, and died on a cross at Easter. Baptism was practised, and the sign of the cross was made on the foreheads of all newly-baptised converts. Mithra was considered to be the saviour of the world, conferring on his followers an eternal life in Heaven, and, similar to the story of Jesus, he died to save all others, provided that they were his followers " http://members.aol.com/MercStG/ChriMithPage1.html

And I too have found it a bit too "coincidental" for it to be mere Coincidence.  

It might also be an interesting fact for you to know that Constantine himself was Pagan and that in order to unite his empire and cease the civil religious unrest he renounced his own religion, adopted Christianity, the new religion, and declared Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire.  

Kerri

Thanks Guys,

I just went back and checked out his site again myself and he has made many improvements that make it much easier to navigate and he also explains more about what he is doing.  www.petercoop.com

I can't wait until he goes, I know it will be life transforming for him... So exciting!!!

Kerri

Gandalf would do a much more eloquent job of this for me and could explain some of the religious significance in Anointing someone before death.  Jesus was anointed BY MARY with Oil before his death.  This is the smearing of perfumed oil upon the brow which was done by a High preistess or a woman of the highest significance within religious customs.  I have done a quick google search here and have come up with some papers written by other scholars like Gandalf in order to make this point more clearly.

I've snipped a few sources here--  
The following is from this site; http://www.thewhitemoon.com/mary/magdalene.html

Perhaps the strongest, piece of evidence is the anointing of Jesus with the sacred oil, an event which (uncharacteristically) was recorded in all four New Testament Gospels, pointing to its significance. The anointing of the Jesus' head with oil (as described in Mark 14:3-4) is an unmistakable symbol of The Sacred Marriage, a ceremony performed by temple priestesses.

Here is a definition of the word anoint:

The practice of anointing with perfumed oil was common among the Hebrews. (1.) The act of anointing was significant of consecration to a holy or sacred use; hence the anointing of the high priest (Ex. 29:29; Lev. 4:3) and of the sacred vessels (Ex. 30:26). The high priest and the king are thus called "the anointed" (Lev. 4:3, 5, 16; 6:20; Ps. 132:10). Anointing a king was equivalent to crowning him (1 Sam. 16:13; 2 Sam. 2:4, etc.). Prophets were also anointed (1 Kings 19:16; 1 Chr. 16:22; Ps. 105:15). The expression, "anoint the shield" (Isa. 21:5), refers to the custom of rubbing oil on the leather of the shield so as to make it supple and fit for use in war.

Here's a good link, well thought out and very scholarly explaining the slanderous nature that the Church has treated Mary Magdalene.  http://lor.trincoll.edu/~papers/1996/mary.html

And this one: http://www.the-cauldron.fsnet.co.uk/BLACK_MAR1.htm
Mary of Magdalene is one of the most fascinating and enigmatic figures in the New Testament and her unique relationship to Jesus has never been adequately explained. In the gospels she was also known as Mary of Bethany and was (mis)represented in non-Biblical clerical sources as a prostitute and adulterer. In John 11:2 she is the sister of Lazarus who Jesus 'raised from the dead'. Some writers believe this particular 'miracle' was a coded reference to a death and rebirth initiation into the Christian mysteries. Mark 14:3 describes how Jesus visited Bethany and he was anointed by a woman. She used an ointment made from a plant called spikenard contained in an alabaster jar. This 'woman with the alabaster jar' has been identified as Mary Magdalene. By this symbolic act she was recognising Jesus as the messiah or Christos 'the anointed one'. He was the sacred king, the scapegoat, who must die for his people that their sins are cleansed. Jesus himself acknowledged this fact when he remarked that by her action the woman had prepared him for burial. In the pagan rituals of Sumeria, Babylonia and Canaan the ritual anointing of the sacred king with oil was carried out by the priestess or royal bride. She was the representative of the goddess and this ritual act was a prelude to the 'sacred marriage' of the God and Goddess.

Kerri

[proof]

There is as much proof that he was married as there is that he wasn't.

Kerri

James,

That's what I was trying to point out with my response to exothen.  Why would a woman be excluded from being the one who he loved?

Kerri

This may be a bit off topic but I wonder why in that painting, Christ seems to be grabbing for her wine and the dark haired person in front of Peter seems to be grabbing for her bread. Every time I look at this I cant help but be curious... It seems to me that there is some symbology of the Body and blood of Christ represented in the Wine and the Bread but I don't know enough about the apostles and what they did after his death to know what the symbolism is there.

Also, i think this needs mention... When you paint something, every detail is deliberate because you have to paint it in there. it'a not like taking a picture where you might accidentally get someone with their finger up their nose... it is all deliberate so every detail is there by the artist's choosing.

kerri

[the disciple whom Jesus loved following them; the one who also had leaned back on His bosom at the supper]

quote:Originally posted by exothen

runlola,

quote:The Urantia Book maintains

AHHHHHH!!! I am currently debating someone on another forum who believes in the Urantia Book, for whatever reason.

Gandalf,

I am not an art expert, so please tell me if Leonardo often used the "yin-yang" theme in his paintings or if this happens to be the only one.

John 21:20-23, "20 Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them; the one who also had leaned back on His bosom at the supper and said, "Lord, who is the one who betrays You?" 21 So Peter seeing him said to Jesus, "Lord, and what about this man?" 22 Jesus said to him, "If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me!" 23 Therefore this saying went out among the brethren that that disciple would not die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but only, "If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?"

John was the one reclining on Jesus at the last supper. This is seen in the actual acount:

John 13:21-25, "21 When Jesus had said this, He became troubled in spirit, and testified and said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, that one of you will betray Me." 22 The disciples began looking at one another, at a loss to know of which one He was speaking. 23 There was reclining on Jesus' bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. 24 So Simon Peter gestured to him, and said to him, "Tell us who it is of whom He is speaking." 25 He, leaning back thus on Jesus' bosom, said to Him, "Lord, who is it?""

Please tell me Gandalf: how did Leonardo paint young men? Did they ever look effeminate? Would that be consistent with the era in which Leonardo painted The Last Supper?

Leonardo clearly painted The Last Supper according to the biblical account of the last supper. Anything having to do with MM in the painting is pure conjecture.

I wonder if Leonardo was in the habit of painting men with breasts...  Because if that's John, he has rather large breasts for a guy!

Here's a link to an image of Da Vinci's Last Supper:
www.indiezelda.com/davinci/lastsupper.html Study it.

Couldn't the one who he loved have been a woman?  Are you suggesting that he would have loved a man more than a woman?  Or perhaps you are suggesting that men are more worthy of love than women, therefore loving a woman was unthinkable... take your pick.

Here's a copy of a thread I started a while ago.  This is the opening post to that topic, "Did Peter turn Magdeline into a Prostitute?"
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9822

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Last night, I was reading the gospel of Mary (Mary Magdalene) from the Nag Hammadi Library where she talks about some information that the Risen Christ imparted to her during a private conversation. Unfortunately, most of the conversation between herself and Christ were missing from the codecies (supposedly people were using the pages to fuel fire) when they were discovered in the Nag Hammadi desert. When reading this, it struck me that it is not so important about the content of their conversation as the way it was received by the other apostles in her company.

My observations in reading these are that the apostle Peter had great contempt for Mary Magdalene because she was a woman. Also based on the language used, I believe that Magdalene was indeed married to Christ and was turned into a prostitute by the church... I will expand upon this later. Over and over again, it is stated that Mary Magdalene was loved by Christ more than any other woman and more than all the other male apostles. In fact, after the risen savior had this conversation with Magdalene, when she told the other apostles of their conversation, Peter said this, "Did he really speak to a woman without our knowledge and not openly? Are we to turn around and listen to her? Did he prefer her to us?" In Magdalene's defense, Levi stated to Peter, "Peter you have always been hot tempered. Now I see you contending against the woman like the adversaries. But if the Savior made her worthy, who are you indeed to reject her? Surely the savior knows her very well. That is why he loved her more than us. Rather let us be ashamed and put on the perfect man and acquire him for ourselves as he commanded us, and preach the gospel, not laying down any other rule or law beyond what the savior said."



I used to work in a Glatt Kosher hotel and the clientele was mainly a very religious sect of Judaism known as the Hassidic Jews. It is my opinion that this sect who is very traditional in lifestyle would be very similar to the devout Jews during the time of Christ. In this sect, my observations were that women were seen mainly as second class citizens and their opinions on spiritual matters were seen as insignificant. In fact, in the Synagogue, women are not allowed on the main floor where the lessons are taught and are expected to remain in the balcony or separated off from the men in some way. In fact, they are not even allowed to use the main entrances and are usually relegated to using some side door into the house of worship.

Since Peter and Paul went forth and created the Christian Church, if Peter were indeed a misogynist (woman hater,) wouldn't it make sense that he (being human) had an agenda when going forward and teaching the gospels to the people? If indeed his attitude were one that women were inferior to men (which seems obvious to me,) might he then try to discredit Magdalene and turn her into a prostitute in order to dismiss her role as an equal counterpart in the life of Christ, the Savior? Wouldn't it serve his own self interests to do so, creating a bachelor of Christ (requiring no physical feminine counterpart) and thereby denying Magdalene and (as a result) all women the true understanding that we are as valuable in the eyes of God (Christ being the human incarnation of God in the Christian tradition) as any man?


Kerri

Isn't that the ONLY subliminal message ever in anything??? As they say... it sells!

kerri

Phong,

I'm not talking brawn or brains here.  I guess I'm talking about confidence in ones self and the power to make things happen.  I'm also talking about the ability to set an intention and over and over again, see that intentionality become a physical reality, therby controlling the universe through my thoughts... which I do and am doing more and more frequently.  

I'm the type of person who will spill out a thousand thoughts about something and people will be like, "Where the hell did she come from?" and because I have very focused views, they feel threatened because I BELIEVE in myself... This is the ULTIMATE POWER... and this is what it means to be a Powerful person...  To believe in Ones Self and therefore believe in your own personal power.  This confidence comes across and people feel threatened... sometimes.

Kerri

[Lola,]

quote:Originally posted by Kazbadan

Runlola, in general agressivity it is associeted to men, because they are more naturally agressive than women. Just that. They have more hormones and they have a different nature that makes men more agressive.

Of coarse that you can be an agressive women. But an agressive women it is not the same as a dare and strong women (maybe similar, but not the same).

-Kaz-

I am not convinced that this is true.  When I was growing up, I was every bit as expressive as I am now... I had it stifled as a kid... particularly when it came to boys.

I just wanted to tell the world how I felt when I had a crush on someone (including the boy who happened to be the object of my desire at that particular moment) My father would always say to me, "Don't call boys, they don't like agressive girls.  You'll never have a boyfriend if you go around chasing boys... you need to let them come to you."   How frustrating and stifling for a girl who felt things very deeply to be told not to express her feelings!!!

So, I believe that the coy trait that some women have (not all) may be just social conditioning.  Similarly, I know many little boys now, the age of my kids whose fathers instill in them that playing with dolls and wanting to play dressup is bad and a "girly thing to do."  I believe that much of this has gone on with boys and girls through the ages.  As if there's something wrong with these things.  I buy trucks for my girls and they also love cars and dinosaurs... They also love to dress up and have tea parties.  I don't tell them that certain things are bad because boys like it.  

The message some of these kids have gotten and are still getting IMO is that Feminine = weak, Masculine = strong.  Weak = bad for boys, Strong = bad for girls.  Anything outside of this distorted paradigm is seen as threatening and unacceptable.  

Kaz,... woman is the singular, women is the plural.  It's the same as man is singular, men is plural.  Just put the "wo" in front of it. []

Lola,

quote:Kerri, it sounds to me like your heart chakra is on full blast.
keep it going girl!

It feels this way... I made a commitment to myself recently that I'm going to express myself in whatever way feels most natural and to my surprise, sometimes I've found that I'm spontaneously giving people kisses & hugs & other expressions of affection... without thinking about it, catching myself off guard... kind of like, "whoa, where'd that come from?"  It's like I've given my spirit permission to be who she really is (who is the real ME) and indeed allowing myself to LOVE freely.  So yes, I believe you are correct... it's bursting. []



James,

quote:
Lighthouse, I believe you are a good example of someone who is opening up to allow the Earth's increase in female energy to empower them. This is wonderful to see! I just hope that males come to realise that there is nothing at all to fear from this.

Thanks, I think it's great too... [] I hope more men can see this too because the more powerful women become, the more they accept themselves, the more fun it can be for both men and women. I'm sure I'm not the only woman who along with claiming her feminine power, is becoming much more passionate, loving, free and sexually expressive... How much fun for a male counterpart who is not threatened by this!!!! [:X]

Love,
Kerri

BTW Sahlyn, Love your seductress/vixen/Elvira whatever you want to call her.

What I'm talking about is the power of becoming more authentic (At least I think that's where it comes from.) As I stated, people who I've never met are starting to FEEL me.  This is a result of my releasing my limitations.  As I release my limitations, I break off pieces of my mental and psychological armor.  As I break off pieces of my armor, my being expands.  Because my being is expanding, I am harnessing more of the power of the universe.  I'm not so busy holding on to the armor and experiences are happening more rapidly... My light is shining through more brilliantly.  REcently I've had the experience where I'll have a thought and soon afterward, I'll have the experience that this thought created... it's a bit esoteric so I hope you understand.  

Anyway, this is part of the power thing... harnessing the power of the Universe... many men love it but some are threatened by it... btw, many women are too.

Kerri

[I]

Thank you Frank,

Welcome Back!  This helps to answer a question I've had about a dream I had a while back.  

I'm a public speaker and a while ago gave a speech about how the context of my "negative" expreiences was what I needed in order to heal my thoughts.  I also said in the speech that when someone "attacks" us, it is because they identify the same "weakness" in the "victim" that they perceive to be their own weakness.  In an effort to elevate their own feelings of self worth, the person will attack the "victim."

Anyway, during the speech I felt a release as my eyeballs started leaking and the next night I had this AMAZING dream:

In the dream, I was giving the same speech and was sitting at a HUGE round table with tons of other sitting around it.  To my right was the guy who called me FAT on the bus every day in junior high school.  As I was getting to the part where I imitated the way he tormented me, he started becoming visibly nervous.  I started rubbing his leg and arm to let him know this was okay and I was okay, he'll know why when I'm done.  I finished the speech by saying that he gave me one of the greatest gifts anyone had ever given me because he did such a great job at making me feel so badly about myself that I HAD to see what I needed to heal in my own thinking through that experience.

When it was over, I thanked him and gave him the most healing hug I have ever experienced.  It felt so real and I was high off of it for months afterwards.

Thank you for your insight... now I know it was real and he too was healed on some level.

Kerri

Besides, MM was with him all the time, traveled with him... Look a bit into Christian Art, you will see Mary Magdeline at the foot of Jesus in many.  Additionally, go look at the picture of the last supper in the DaVinci Code thread posted by Kazbadan (in book recommendateions.)  You will see MM sitting at the right of Jesus, dressed like him in the exact opposite colors (sort of a Yin-yang) And... she was one of his 3 female traveling companions, the other 2 were his mother and sister.  Perhaps the marriage was kept secret otherwise they would have crusified HER too.

Do you not believe thatGod lives within all beings?  
Mary M. included?

Is having Sex sinful?

Why do you assume that an enlightened being would not enjoy sex?  

Lets say we were all enlightened beings, does that mean we would all stop having sex?  It doesn't seem to go along with the natural order of things to me.

We know very little about the life of Jesus, what if he was married to MM just prior to the crusifixion and had conjugal sex?

Kerri

Thanks Nick,

I'll add that to my Amazon Wish list []

Kerri

I'd gladly pay $10.00 to have an annual membership tp AP, whether especially if it will increase the quality of discussions in some of the forums.  

I love AP and many people who I have met here.  Each week I give in many different ways to people who I love and ideas that I believe in so this makes perfect sense to me.  

Additionally, I like the idea of keeping thise limited forums available for viewing to un-subscribed or free members because that will encourage people to want to participate in higher levels of growth, sharing and conversation by subscribing in order to share in these strictly moderated forums.

Kerri

Michael,

I've noticed this from time to time too... in fact, once, I was online at the same time as the person I was Pm'ing to and they seemed to keep disappearing so I thought that person was not getting them... I must have retyped the message 4 times.  I finally concluded that it must be that when the other person deletes a message, it is also deleted from your inbox/outbox.  I don't know if I'm right, however.

Kerri

Stephen,

Sheesh!  No wonder people are afraid of God... when her representatives are so ruthless in punishment and claim that it is the will of God!

Kerri

I sent a copy of Tisha's original post to my husband a while ago and here was his response to it:

I believe that there came a point in history when religion began to be used as a potent weapon or tool of control.

Prior to the rise of organized religions, religion actually served a purpose, and it seems from the article you quote, that it was woman based, which makes sense.  Mother Earth, right?!?!

Later, the religions became, in my opinion, perversions of the very teachings they quoted.

So, the simple language of Christ's teachings, which I would summarize as the golden rule, becomes organized Christianity's statement that "you will go to hell unless you accept that Christ died for our sins."

Meanwhile, by definition, Christ's teachings predated his "death" right?  So, he never tought this.  Only the people who wanted to use Christ as a weapon created this bogosity.  

In other words, I never saw anything in the New Testament where Christ himself went around teaching that he was going to die for our sins, or am I wrong?
This is all later day interpretation.

So, my argument is that current Christianity is NOT what Christ himself taught, and in fact misses the point of Christ.

What a bogosity to say that the religion is based on blind acceptance that this person died for our sins.  It should be his teachings that count.