| Author | Message | ||
    Thomas Member Post Number: 389 Registered: 03-2004 |
In reference to BEAM being able to return at any time to the AA level, that is also incorrect according to BEAM. He has said that the decision to return from the AA level specifically entailed the fact that his spirit form lineage would have to go through the evolution process of the countless physical lives again in order to return to the AA level (although he would have the advantage as of recently that he could access the storage banks of that level since he was once a part of it). Maybe the confusion is due to the fact that the Plejaren said that BEAM could live with them in the Plejares if he ever wanted too. | ||
Sirashwin Member Post Number: 118 Registered: 05-2007 |
But if Billy could access the storage banks of the Arhat Athersata level why can't he theoretically speaking not be able to go back directly ? | ||
Lonnie Member Post Number: 253 Registered: 12-1999 |
Dear Thomas and Sirshwin, He can go back directly if he wants to. Billy only has a "cap" placed over him. As long as he is living under this "cap" and involved in this mission, he will have to live like everyone else. But since the spirit in Billy has this free will that we were discussing, and since his spiritual consciousness has the ability to be in contact with Arahat Athersata as well as have access to the storage banks, theoretically speaking and in reality speaking, if he so desires he can have this "cap" removed and return any time he wants to. Without having this free will the mission could not be accomplished and Creation would be destroyed. Concerning the 21 helpers, I am certain this is correct. They are not as old as Billy's spirit but they are still from Arahat Athersata. They are helpers without mistakes and are not involved in the mission. Probably half of them are alive today and the rest are in the beyond and will come back in the future again as helpers. As I said, when I find the exact reference I will post it here. Please be patient. Lonnie | ||
The_original_dave Member Post Number: 91 Registered: 05-2007 |
Because he has to work his way back up to the AA level naturally through the process of evolution. Thomas would Billy be able to live on Erra or any other of there planets in the Tayget system without a problem. I know his vibrations are perfectly balanced so there would be no problem there but it is to my understanding that man of earth cannot live on Erra due to there atmosphere or something, we cannot tolerate it. Could Billy really be taken to live on Erra if he ever wanted too. Doesn't that go against the p's directives like it does to save any earthman from man of earth caused disaster. | ||
Thomas Member Post Number: 392 Registered: 03-2004 |
Because when he reverted to human form so to speak, his consciousness had to start over in order to fit into material existence. When he "gave up" his conscious consciousness (spiritually speaking), it was a no turning back decision as I understand it. Now he must, like the rest of us, relearn everything in order to join back into the AA level (although it will be the first time for the rest of us when we join that level). | ||
Scott Moderator Post Number: 1314 Registered: 12-1999 |
Hello, While this topic concerning Billy's spirit form is interesting, it does not really correspond with this topic heading "Creation Itself". Please continue any further responses in the appropriate topic area. No further posts will be accepted unless they correspond with the topic heading. Scott | ||
Christian Moderator Post Number: 158 Registered: 02-2000 |
I agree with Scott, but before closing this discussion here I want to add that Lonnie is on a wrong track because nowhere in FIGU's more than 25.000 pages (published and non-published) is there any mentioning of such 21 helpers. The Nokodemjon spirit form is the only one that ever returned from the AA level/sphere, and this is an absolute exception and will never happen again. But yes, there is a possibility that Billy or rather his spirit form may return instantly into the AA level, but of course he doesn't tell anybody here on Earth. And you can be sure that he doesn't take the "short cut". | ||
Cpl Member Post Number: 310 Registered: 08-2004 |
Hello Lonnie, You wrote, "Without having this free will the mission could not be accomplished and Creation would be destroyed." It is impossible for Creation to be destroyed. The destruction of Creation is a null and void concept. Best, cpl | ||
Adityasonakia Member Post Number: 58 Registered: 07-2007 |
Dear Chris, I was wondering, what if a unviverse gets destroyed, then what happens to the creation of that universe??  Salome Adi | ||
Sirashwin Member Post Number: 122 Registered: 05-2007 |
Dear Cpl I guess in the above discussion Lonnie was referring to the destruction of the material belt of Creation. Salome ashwin | ||
Phi_spiral Member Post Number: 171 Registered: 03-2007 |
This is a continuation of a string begun under the Religion heading. Cpl: "If you see real actual differences between what Creation is and what First Source is I'd be interested to hear about them." Hi Chris, You misunderstood my comments about The Wingmakers material and the Meier material. Maybe I can clarify with this analogy. Let’s say two 12-year-olds, one a boy and one a girl, are writing a paper about, What Is A Rose for a school assignment. Perhaps the girl’s description will focus on the beauty with more details about the softness and texture of the petals, the little curl on the edges as they start to unfold, the feeling she gets when she inhales the scent. Perhaps she may fail to mention the thorns on the stem altogether. The boy on the other hand may start off by giving it’s Latin name followed closely by a prominent mention of the thorns since he had been kissed by them way too many times. Now if a third party came along who had no concept of a rose, read only one of the two reports, they might have a stronger impression of either it’s beauty or it’s potential harm. Or perhaps one of the two children has a deeper and fuller understanding of a rose because he/she helped a parent grow them in their parent’s nursery for many years, nursing them from seedlings and their report is 3 or 4 times more thorough than the other’s. Yes, they are both talking about a rose. But you can not say that the two reports convey the same understanding of a rose. The point I was simply making is that the best way to understand creation in the context of the Meier material is to read and study creation in the context of the Meier material. And even then, we are told that we can have still greater understanding by studying it in the German language. Regards Bob | ||
Cpl Member Post Number: 324 Registered: 08-2004 |
Hi Bob, I agree with all you say here. "Yes, they are both talking about a rose. But you can not say that the two reports convey the same understanding of a rose." Exactly, but they do both convey understandings of a rose; different understandings. Both are also accurate to those who can appreciate the respective descriptions. Of course, if one wants to understand about Creation one is going to understand it best by looking at the Meier material because this is his terminology and an inseparable part of his message just as one will better understand First Source by reading the WingMakers material because it is an inseparable part of that message. But if, as in your good analogy above, both are actually talking about the same thing, that is by any name or description that "rose", then one can learn about the signified rose by researching either route, or both. As in your analogy, it will depend upon the personality which route -- or description -- appeals and therefore is taken. As far as the goal is concerned either will suffice. Either way will also jar against the personality of certain persons desirous of knowing and/or experiencing more of the "rose". No one description will suit all character types. IMO the future will see interesting developments in this regard on our planet: different schools of thought describing Creation or First Source -- and probably more variations in name in the future will evolve -- in different ways according to the group or school's members' characteristics, just as in your analogy. (This may even be indicated in Daniel's interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream in Dan.2.44.) The differences will likely be based on character and personality trait IMO. One can already see two of these schools of thought developing: the Meier and the WingMakers; and IMO there will likely be more in the future because of our incredible diversity of character types on our planet, no doubt due to its long interactive galactic history. I do not know for sure, but it seems the Ps have a more homogeneous type of character on their planet with almost all leaning heavily toward the scientific, and logical. IMO this counterpart will and is developing on our planet starting in central Europe with FIGU, but it will not IMO satisfy all on our planet due to the great character variance existing in our world. There will be other descriptions of the "rose" but they will all be talking about the same thing while using the different terminology and concepts that work best for those others. Regards, cpl | ||
Unluckyguy26 New member Post Number: 1 Registered: 10-2007 |
hi billy! this is my first time i just stumble on this i didnt even know if i could ask you question.And there was me imagining myself in your presence asking you countless of questions. its been almost a month now since i found out about you and i cant stop reading. i always have that sense of me never alone. when i was about 17 i had physical proof that there were life other than on earth when i saw a ufo moving so fast across the sky and stop at different point back and forth before disapear into the night sky.it was above earth's atmosphere. My question is since ive been reading more about you and some of your publications  i became more aware of a lots of things and 3 times now i feel as though that ive been somewhere else. one night at 4am after reading i had a strange feeling taking over me and after that i felt safe and there was sort of a huming sound while my eyes close i can sense that im laying down but around me didnt feel like i was alone. in a matter of seconds i started to "dream" im not sure if it was or if i was a visit that i had. i saw a lot of stars and a bleu planet that looked} like earth. i feel like there was more but thats all i can remember, but before i could get up i was told to contact a specific guy that you might heard of George Green. telepathicly they keep telling me to contact him. so just like that i was awake with this feeling of peace and joy so i fell back asleep. So could i have been visited or it was just a dream cause im findind the truth and that my conciousness is bringing out things that might have been happen in my previous life? please answer at unluckyguy26@yahoo.com thank you sincerly to you with peace and love. | ||
Badr Moderator Post Number: 240 Registered: 12-2004 |
Dear unluckyguy26, Billy doesn’t read the forum. If you would like to contact him directly you could either send a letter through post or by fax, the information you can find on the main FIGU website. There is the section for asking questions to Billy, if you are able to catch it… it’s still open for the time being. Salome, Badr | ||
Freelight New member Post Number: 1 Registered: 12-2007 |
Greetings all, Newbie here. I've just recently dived into UFO/ET phenomena, with my primary interest being the spiritual teachings of higher ET's. Naturally Billy Meier, his 'Talmud of Jmmanuel' and other teachings came up, and I came upon FIGU here. My previous studies include the Urantia Book, Keys of Enoch...on the ET end of things...and some light-listening to channeled teachers, like Bashar. I had recently joined the Abundant Hope forum after reading some of the Pheonix Journal material where a commentarial is given expanding on the 'Talmud of Jmmanuel' material. I think the transmitters called it 'And his name shall be called Immanuel' - they call Jesus name 'Esu Sananda'. Ok, now on topic, - the teaching of 'The Creation' in the MM(meier material) is truly best first understood within the context of the teaching - the metaphysical dimension within the spiritual cosmology, as it integrates into the Whole. It has appeared that some more traditional theists have issues over the teaching seeming to exalt the 'Creation' over the 'Creator'. But one would need to read enough of the MM to get the gist of 'how' the Creation is understood. I being a more metaphysical type and universalist...can hold to both the traditional perspective and more unconventional views within an all-encompassing cosmology. The Creation is Infinite. I recently remember reading a website of a gal claiming to be Semjase blue star or something. She thought that the Talmud of Jmmanuel exalted the Creation above the Creator..and said that was more or less incorrect. She's a star-person...you'd think she was a bit more liberal now. Anyways,...the concept of 'The Creation' appealed to me and has drawn me to the higher ET teachings as a natural evolution of my own spiritual inights and unfoldings. I have been expanding my writings to include the higher cosmic dimensions of soul and spirit. The ET's have a better more universal grasp of cosmic dimensions on 'God' whether we call this 'Reality',...the 'Creation' or the 'Creator'. Again,...its a dimensional perspective, terminology and contextual issue tailored by the theological perspective of the viewer. I take all views and coverge them into 'one',...and keep the best 'angles' on it. All is truly One, and we can consider the whole Context and content of LIFE to be 'Creation' for the creative spirit, light, mind and consciousness of All That IS, is inherent within every-thing that exists and continues to arise within the One. I've just created a new discussion thread on 'ET teachings' in a more conservative fundie christian forum, and just finished a post about FIGU with links and commentary. I am ever 'building bridges'....just sharing objectively and being true to the spiritual principles of each school I study. Thanks all for your insights as well on the Creation. To help conventional theists along, it helps to see Creator and Creation as ONE. The Creation is the Matrix of all, all the creative cycles and generations of life, space and time revolving within Infinity. How we merge concepts of Creator and Creation as One will be up to our spiritual creativity. But always,...the Universal idiom stands, 'All is One'. Blessings! paul http://www.freewebs.com/pauljosephpurcell/ | ||
Hector Member Post Number: 342 Registered: 04-2006 |
Hi Paul, your last 2 paragraphs prove that you are well versed about the concept of "creation" or "universal consciousness". Everything that exists, it exists because it was brought to existence by The Creation.Nothing exists because of coincidences.Your right, all is one.Many million people on Earth do not understand this simple truth.You do. I also share your analogy of creation as a "matrix" or "network" that pervades and permeates everything, being a cohesive power that binds and structures this known universe through a set of given rules which we call "the creational laws".(Cause-effect, time-space, bipolarity, there is no place for illogic in the spiritual world, everything is cyclic, everything is structured around number 7, matter is a concentration of creational energy...) The creational laws and commandments of creation are manifestations of Creation.With such laws, creation makes itself visible, understandable, acknoledgeable to living creatures.Such laws are 100% logical, foolproof, infallible, and not subject to any changes for all eternity.That is what Billy and the plejaren teach.(I agree with them). Be welcome! | ||
Freelight New member Post Number: 2 Registered: 12-2007 |
Hello Hector, Blessings. I am only familiar with the MM(meier material) thru Talmud of Jmmamuel(ToJ) and the spiritual teaching excerpts from the site here. Apparently that covers the fundamentals from the Plajaren perspective. What is wonderful is how universal truths all synthesize in the primary concept, or 'creational laws' and these remain eternal. I will continue to check out some more threads here on the 'science of Creation' as it were. This resonates with my inner gnostic, lol. True 'knowledge'....which is the light of understanding and wisdom....centered in the Supreme Law of Love. Honor and glory to the One Law, the One Love. I naturally have a more devotional side to me,...as a 'theist',...but enjoin these sentiments with the spiritually scientific aspects of the laws as well. It also appears that some who hold to the MM primarily could lean more towards a humanist/scientific pantheist purview....in distinction from the more traditional theism. So....we have interesting dimensional facets within these perspectives.I think I will after some more time, begin a blog or website just on the ET teachings. I did notice that here on the mainpage it was put out that the company here did not endorse the following teachers or their claims. Elsewhere it has been mentioned that Meier is the sole} 'contactee' on this planet, at least with the beings he has met. On the list were some teachers I was familiar with. I do respect beliefs, and we each shall choose which teachings resonate with our spirit. Universe blessings, paul http://www.freelightexpress.com *** Serving Life | ||
Matthew_deagle Member Post Number: 20 Registered: 08-2007 |
Paul, I'm afraid to say that very little of what you have just stated actually resonates with the spirit-teachings which Billy has brought us. Read my post in the "Skeptics" section, and also consider that Billy does not stand for any beliefs, and 'respect of beliefs' has nothing to do with the Spirit-Teachings. See the 49 Basic Rules of Humankind. "11. Jeder Mensch soll nicht irgendwelchen Dingen Glauben schenken, sondern stets die grundsätzliche Wahrheit suchen, die er nur in sich selbst zu finden vermag, wenn er alles durchforscht und überdenkt, seine Vernunft, seinen Verstand und seine gesunde Logik walten lässt. So vermag der Mensch die Wahrheit nur in sich selbst zu finden, doch das auch nur, wenn er frei ist von irgendwelchem Glauben an Dinge, die er niemals in sich selbst zu beweisen vermag. Glaube nämlich ist kein Beweis, sondern nur etwas, das als lieb, begehrenswert und als richtig angenommen wird, ohne dass dafür ein Wahrheitsgehalt angeführt werden kann, folglich also ein Glaube niemals beweiskräftig sein kann, weil eben die Tatsache der beweisbaren Wahrheit fehlt. 11. Each human being shall not believe in any thing, but shall always search for the basic truth, which he can only find within himself if he searches and thinks about everything, and by using his reason, his understanding and his sound logic. Thus the human being may find the truth only within himself, but only if he is free of any belief in things he can never prove within himself. Belief is not proof, but simply something that is assumed to be kind, desirable and right, without any provable content of truth; consequently, a belief can never be cogent because of the fact that the provable truth is missing." Also, Urantia, channelling, and most of the rest of the 'New Age' movement has been declared and in some ways proven by the Plejaren to be totally false and oriented at the mind-control of human beings through illusions and false beliefs. Saalome, - Matthew | ||
Mqhassan Member Post Number: 21 Registered: 06-2006 |
Hello Pheotonsfire and other interested FIGU members in Cosmology. The seven layers of the Universe described with the corresponding layer widths assumed an initial big bang at a hyper-inflation rate of 10^7000 times the speed of light ! Well the current given value for the rate of expansion of the creational expansion belt of 147 times the speed of light, will give us a rate of 1.47 x 10^8 light years for every million years. I dont know whether this ratio is valid for the other layers including the material fourth layer. Anyhow I think we have a very important role to play in explaining the material universe by studying the Plejaran information. Summarizing the available information shows that the material belt actually begins at 2 x 10^14 L.Y. and has a width of 2.5 x 10^15 L.Y. When trying to understand this within our current scientific understanding in cosmology , in which a radius of no more that 20 billion years or 2 x 10^10 L.Y is assumed, we find an error by a factor of 10,000 in our present estimate. What makes the things even worse is the actual thickness of the material universe of 2.5 x 10^15 L.Y, and that alone will provide a thickness that is 12 times the minimum boundary layer radius with a current expansion rate of 147 C. All this gives us a discrepancy in the order of 10^32 in the number of galaxies in the material universe ! ( Comparing the current science number of galaxies in the order of 10^12 with the 423 x 10^42 given) There is also a very important factor, that our observable universe is limited to receeding velocites reaching the speed of light only. But on the other hand the maximum distance any galaxy can be within the material belt will be limited to an estimate of PI times the radius of the upper boundary layer which is 2 x 10^14 LY plus 2.5 x 10^15 LY So some values given by Billy during his 1975 trip are incompatible with the current model explained simplistically to us, because the figures mentioned on the distances of some galaxies are higher than the thickness of the material belt by several orders of magnitude. For this reason we need to modify the model given to us, and present a more accurate version of the material universe which would give us the different rates of expansion versus time until it reaches the maximum in the next (155 minus 46 ) trillion years. Salome Mqhassan | ||
J_rod7 Member Post Number: 67 Registered: 10-2007 |
Hello Mqhassan, Your post #21 appears to very well researched, well done. I stumbled on one bit which you wrote: >> "...different rates of expansion versus time until it reaches the maximum in the next (155 minus 46 ) trillion years." << What does it mean "(155 minus 46) trillion"? I understand mathematics very deeply, and that notation makes not much sense to me. Did you mean to employ an exponent? Salome Let Our LOVE show in all actions, J_rod7 | ||
Mqhassan Member Post Number: 22 Registered: 06-2006 |
Hello J_rod7 What I meant here is that we are at the 46 trillionth year from the big bang while the maximum expansion it will reach at the 155th trillion So I meant the remaining time from now to the maximum expansion point. Salome Mqhassan | ||
Thomas Member Post Number: 406 Registered: 03-2004 |
Don't limit your thinking Mqhassan. BEAM could also have travelled "along" the belt and not just across the width... :-) | ||
Mqhassan Member Post Number: 23 Registered: 06-2006 |
Thomas, If you make a round trip around the belt at the outer boundary layer you will end up with the following : 3.5 LY ( Central Core ) plus 10^14 LY ( Ur Core ) plus 10^14 LY ( Ur Belt ) plus 2.5x10^15 LY ( Material Belt ). So if your travel is within the material universe you can reach any point in the material universe ( circle around the material belt in about 2.7 x 10 ^15 x 2 x PI LY ) assuming a circle around the sphere of that particular radius. That will equal to 1.7 x 10^16 LY Only. So as a result of this conclusion, one might ask whether the trip in the universe and the visit of different galaxies in the material universe was done through curved paths extending to the transformation and creational expansion belts and back to the material belt to reduce time , even if the distance is a much longer path ? Perhaps there are time short cuts in the universe ? I dont know, and this is open to discussion Salome mqhassan ( Mohammed ) |
