| Author |
Message |
   
Edward
Member
Post Number: 2061
Registered: 05-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, April 17, 2011 - 04:17 am: | 
|
Hi Jun...
Just read the Meier Materials, and you will come across the mentioned insight.
And utilize the Search Engine(; further details), if you will? Much has
already been discussed in the past. And these 'excerpts' are quite easy to
remember.
Thank you for your understanding.
Edward. |
Elreyjr
Member
Post Number: 228
Registered: 01-2009
| | Posted on Monday, April 18, 2011 - 02:56 am: |
|
Hi Edward,
Thank you for your help.
But I do not think now that your really know. You may have read the materials several times but still you do not know it as a fact or truth for which I am very much interested.
Jun
My will be done |
Egerrt
Member
Post Number: 10
Registered: 12-2010
| | Posted on Saturday, June 11, 2011 - 10:50 am: |
|
Hello.
In the Book of Enoch, [Ch. 6:1], it says:
And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.'
Does anyone know how many people (percentage) nowadays have that "alien DNA"? Also what haplogroup(s) (Y-DNA) do these people belong to? |
Edward
Member
Post Number: 2103
Registered: 05-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, June 12, 2011 - 02:45 am: |
|
Hi Egerrt....
As what I can make of this, is: that in those early times the population of
Earth was still very small. And those whom engaged in your mention, would
now...be quite large!
Take heed to, that through time new ET life-forms/beings sought their home here
on Earth and they too engaged with those whom already inherited the DNA, etc.;
and multiplied. Thus, even the mentioned ETs whom settled here...intermixed
with each other, as well, and go on...it did indeed become a 'melting pot' of
new human species.....
Thus, One can sort of come to some calculation/conclusion, I would think?
Edward. |
Loveofcreation
Member
Post Number: 7
Registered: 12-2010
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2011 - 12:20 pm: |
|
Se:kon ("Greetings" in Mohawk language):
I have not visited FIGU Forum USA in a while. However since the Ancient Earth Topic is up I would like to see if anyone knows anything about the elusive 'Olmec' tribe/peoples of South America. I just missed the Questions and Answers to Billy Meier as i was going to ask about these to him.
I have a deep interest in the Ancient Past and getting to the truth of it. I feel deeply connected to various parts of the world. (Perhaps in my past lives I was at these locations)
The Olmec, according to "westernized' anthropology and archaeologists, were a people mostly of negroid descent. Though there were statuettes and rock carvings showing white men and even red men (Native Indian). There are no texts to be found, only rock carvings and statues along with some pottery which is very interesting to say the least.
It is my thought that the Olmec were either the 1st group that arrived here on Earth with Nokodemion or the second group that came here. It is also my opinion that the so-called Garden of Eden was perhaps South America or better yet, the entire Planet Earth. I am aware that only Billy truly knows these details and I am on a personal quest to find these answers. I am not sure why but I feel in time that the purpose of my investigation in this will be revealed. For over a year I had debated with myself on what my 'calling' or personal job was supposed to be in this lifetime. I am studying Environmental Science and though I do care very much what happens to our Planet, I find that Cultural Anthropology is my true calling. I have always wanted to help people, and to learn about other 'real' cultures. I also feel that the Indigenous peoples around the world need to be protected from westerners and industrialization.
Point to all of this is: Has anyone seen or heard from billy anything about the Olmec of South America?
Salome,
Amanda from Massachusetts, USA |
Sitkaa
Member
Post Number: 498
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2011 - 12:04 pm: |
|
The Olmecs were an advanced race, but they were hardly the first. Consider the cyclopean architecture found both in and around Lake Titicaca.
If indeed you are interested in pursuing a career which brings about attitudinal alternations among the masses, how about calling yourself a 'social engineer'?
It is a function of cultures that they change over time. We cannot 'go-back' to what once was. We can only reminisce, and aim to move forward into something better. That said, please keep in mind that all cultures represent their collective knowledge base, their collective subtle hypnoses. Aculturality (only a relative term), while not so cute, is actually more conducive to individual happiness, and by extension, less amenable to the machinations of a culturally-derived sense of morality.
Fur leben.
|
Memo00
Member
Post Number: 500
Registered: 03-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2011 - 06:13 am: |
|
Hello Amanda
The Olmecs were from North America. From the Mexican States of Veracruz and Tabasco. Very little is known about them with absolute certainty. They are considered to be the predecessors of other cultures like the Mayan. What made you think that they could be the "first" human beings that arrived to earth or that they could be linked in any form with Nokodemion?
Salome |
Edward
Member
Post Number: 2119
Registered: 05-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, July 03, 2011 - 04:05 am: |
|
Hi Amanda....
As Memo mentioned, and there were others even before as to what I know from
what I read in the past; names have slipped me, sorry.
And were not of negroid descent, as mentioned by westernized' anthropology and
archaeologists, as far as I can make out.
RED skin tone would be more in it's places; with the knowledge that Olmec and
the Mayans, before and after, were of the same lineage(if not, indirect), but
of course in time could have intermixed with other populations of people. And
the RED skin tone people being one whom migrated from elsewhere...from the
stars; as mentioned in the FIGU Materials.
Your: I also feel that the Indigenous peoples around the world need to be
protected from westerners and industrialization.
I fully agree with you on that!
Billy did mentioned, that every people keep their OWN...Traditions, etc, build
their own Culture, and Identity. Thus, we should NOT - Force Feed - any other
culture our ways of life, and what not; let those peoples be FREE in their own
choice to be who they are and live how THEY...want to life, even if it means
it being not equivalent to our today's western standards.
Main principle within the Teachings is to absorb/accumulate within the
framework of Evolution: step-by-step; each at their own pace. But, as you may
know: GREEDY individuals see otherwise, alas. They should be Removed, if
possible and replaced by those whom are more Creational Spiritual, if you
will.
Nice to hear from again, Amanda....
Edward. |
Peter_brodowski
Member
Post Number: 556
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2011 - 03:07 am: |
|
i would just like to share some ideas and questions, some relates to ancient earth history , it all ties in some degree....
now somewhere on the forum it was said that women are smarter than men.
yet i have found no specific contact report that claims anything aside from that inteligence is passed on from the mother to the child.
to me, that is not the same as saying a woman is smarter than a man.
it also troubles because, everone knows that ones efforts will determine their inteligence in life.
as history has taught me, some things can be mentioned...
1. women naturally exhibit a more compassionate stance to lifeforms and their suffering or dispositions in life.
2. since women are the childbearing ones, they naturally have atleast a basic foundation of charachteristics that allow them to be capable of caring/showing affection/intimacy towards other people (their offspring especially)to a high degree.
so in some regards, women are more well suited and equipped than men
however that is to me, a variable dependant on many factors.
likewise in a mans regard...
they (being the polar opposite of a woman) exhibit characteristics that enable them to have an upper hand in the following ways...
1. men in general are not as easily swayed, nor do they put nearly as much importance on emotion factors towards their decision making.
what seems cold and insensitive to a woman, may be logical and reasonable for a man (in a mans thinking or view of a matter)
2.men have a strong sense of support and duty/responsibility to the family, or to their community.
and now if it would be as simple as women being smarter than men, or stronger (as some claim) i have to ask then...
why is it women are in a lower standing than men on earth in most regards?
in my experiences with women, i see that there is only a potential, and what one chooses to do, decides wether that potential is used to the utmost, resulting in advantagous situations and outcomes.
some shortcomings i have found in women and men....
women: they apply their own female thinking to try to understand or make sense of male behaviour and thought processes.
they allow their emotions to dominate their choices and decisions.
they often needlesly create problems to deal with their insecurities.
they are very self centered.
men: they seldom empathize with women, judging them to be over emotional.
they have a higher tendency to resort to aggression and barbarism.
due to their natural drives and urges, they can treat and look at a woman as an object of pleasure or a tool rather than an equal ally.
each of the advantages and disadvantages in a woman and man are at once, a result of their potential advantages over the other sexe in respective matters.
example: a woman is a sucker for compliments, and a man is a sucker for indulgence.
throught earths history only the following seems clear to me...
if one argues women are stronger or superior in intellect, then they have as a race, consistantly made foolish decisions after foolish decisions, for a very long time.
and have been unable to be put on equal terms to their male counterparts.
if anything, it seems to me that women ave been succesfully subdued by mans barbarity and agressve tendencies and have failed to break free from this cycle of can we say "slavery"?
it seems that neither the man nor the woman have the upper hand, and all advantages can only be achieved if the one sexe helps the other, which signifies a mutual understanding and therefore to me, suggests that a woman is only as grat as the man beside him, and visa versa... and thus, the path to greatness is found in common understanding and equality between the man and woman. further giving weight to the sacred standing of the man-woman relationship.
to me this is evidence that when a man and woman engage in the heterosexual bond of intimate relationship, two really do become one.
only when there is a balance of male and female imput in a relationship, does true progress get made. |
Jokoveltman
Member
Post Number: 69
Registered: 11-2009
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2011 - 08:04 am: |
|
Peter,
Billy has written a pamphlet about the differences between women and men, in which he discusses briefly the cerebral differences. My memory may be faulty - it has been over a year since I read the pamphlet, and I haven't access to it at the moment, as I am away from home - but what I remember is that the corpus collosum (the mass of neurons that connect the right and left hemispheres) is substantially thicker in women, providing for better and faster communication between the spheres. Additionally, he says that in general women have around 14% (I may have the wrong number, here) more neurons in their brains than men.
From other sources, I have seen that testosterone is a pain signal inhibitor, while estrogen is a promoter, thus men sense less pain and women more, because of their respective balances of these hormones. In general, women also have greater and subtler sensitivity in the skin due to a greater number of nerve endings (the higher cerebral neuron count would help here, too).
I also think that many of the features of both men and women that you mention stem from the cultural backgrounds and education (or lack thereof) or personality traits rather than a fundamental difference between men and women. Many men, for example, have difficulty with emotions simply because they never learned to recognize and deal with them. On the other hand, there are also many men who have a refined sense of their emotions (and they are not all gay), and there are also many women who have a hard time with them. I know people in all of these categories.
Self-centred-ness, disrepect in any of its various forms, optimism and pessimism, and various ways of looking at situations are character traits not fundamentally tied to gender, as they result from one's choice of words and actions, which in turn are results of feelings, which are themselves the result of thoughts. As both men and women are human beings, it necessarily follows that they both have the capacity to thought, and therefore to choose how to form their character. Granted, the cultures of Earth do not provide ways to do this consciously, so most people make unconscious decisions when it comes to their character. And because they don't feel like they chose it (even though they did), it is difficult to accept responsibility for it, thus it seems like a simple solution to say "Men are like this" or "Women are like that", because it appears to be so, even though reality is different. In my mind, it is the same as saying "Leo's feel such and such", or "Aquarians think this and that", and so forth.
Finally, I think you are mistaken to say that heterosexual bonds are sacred, because this implies that homosexual bonds are less fulfilling (not to mention that "sacred" seems like a rather religious concept to me). But this does not hold up under logical analysis, as a human being does not depend upon another person nor for a relationship for fulfillment: rather that is entirely up to the individual, regardless of the relationships/bonds they choose.
These are my thoughts in response to your post, and while they are offered with loving and respectful intentions, I know I have a lot to learn in the area of expressing my thoughts clearly and well, so please be patient with me if it seems otherwise.
Salome,
Tim |
Memo00
Member
Post Number: 501
Registered: 03-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 - 05:54 am: |
|
Hello Peter
You asked: "Why is it women are in a lower standing than men on earth in most regards? "
I think it has to do with wrong education, erroneous beliefs (that women are "inferior") and with men taking advantage of their physical strength. (as you may know a lot of things are decided in this crazy world through violence, murder, threats, etc.) Billy has explained that sexism is a characteristic of lesser developed civilizations. This is changing slowly but surely and we see more and more women who stand out in the most diverse fields. If in the past we didn´t saw more women playing important roles it is because it wasn´t allowed by men, for example: Plejaren have explained that Rembrandt´s wife was as good as him and that she is the true author of many paintings attributed to him.
Billy has explained that the most important things in life are freedom, peace, love and harmony. And it is precisely there were women are more advanced than men. For example there are less women (in percentage) that commit crimes.
Salome |
Peter_brodowski
Member
Post Number: 558
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 - 01:22 am: |
|
goods points you two (memo00 and tim)
much to consider and ponder further.
about my view on heterosexual bonds.
i think it is reasonable to be of that opinion, that i shared. i say this for the following...
a heterosexual relationship is the decided natural way that humans procreate. furthermore, that which is natural, or intended by creation should be held with some respect and reverence.
i think it is quite illogical, and reminds me of religeous programming, that one would relate the word sacred, as a religious term.
not that i think there is no love in homosexual bonds, or that they are lesser in value, but i do not think a homosexual bond should be equated in any regard with a heterosexual one. aside from the fact that both are bonds and love may be contained therein.
i would not intend to sound homophobic, as that is not the intention.
and i am sure some will say, it does not matter about the orientation sexually, as long as you love one another etc, but that's besides my point.
there is a reason the heterosexual orientation is the prevalant one among humans, and it is characteristic of n aspect of nature that is of a very high value and importance.
well, i do not want to stray further off topic so thats alll i will say, and thanks for the feedback, it is very insightfull and helpfull to my understanding. |
Jacob
Moderator
Post Number: 702
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 - 04:09 am: |
|
When I analyze your opinion in the framework of the natural creative laws and recommendations it does not hold up.
First we analyze the following aspects:
Male homosexuality and bisexuality is caused by a genetic difference and subsequent different mentality of the material consciousness and feelings of the psyche. This is a NATURAL given un-natural occurrence(natural factors changing the behavior of genes), because it happens via natural causes. It is not-natural only in the sense that two men in a homosexual relationship cannot create offspring.
Female bisexuality is a totally natural occurrence, since a woman is not only able to receive, but also to conceive, the latter is extremely rare and only happens in cases where a humanity is on the verge of dying out, or for some reason the male population has become infertile on a massive scale.
This happens when two females have sex and their mutual psychological influences can trigger the effect that an egg will have a full set of chromosomes instead of just the regular ½ set, and starts to grow into a female embryo. Lesbianism is an result of external influences, mentality and aforementioned natural genetic occurrence. That’s why two lesbian females can be perfectly good mothers for offspring which they become via artificial insemination or in vitro fertilization. Female bisexuality is also a factor in a polygamist marriage between one man en several women, but not an requirement. It’s absolutely possible that a man is married to several heterosexual wives. Women are just vastly superior to men when it comes to creating a home, creating and maintaining peace and harmony. It does not say men can’t do that, they have to work much harder to keep their aggressive impulses in check. Good examples are Quetzal, Ptaah and Eduard etc. who can be regarded how a real man should act and think.
Sidenote about polygamy: The current Earth human race is no way near the developmental level to really understand polygamy, since men would abuse this to their own sexual advantage, nor is the current socalled western civilisation capable of accepting this.
What I want to state is that gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transsexuals form a minority of the Earth humanity, they do not procreate in natural circumstances when you exclude the aforementioned possibility in women. There is NO value judgment from the Creation towards anything, not towards heterosexual men, women, bisexual and gay men and women, transgender, etc. The love in these people is equal yet different in expression when compared to straight people, but of the exact same value.
An heterosexual relationship is NOT more worth just because they, as a rule of thumb, can procreate, and a gay/lesbian couple cant. How many heterosexual marriages and relationships are pure nightmares and horrors and how many kids and women are abused in such relationships?
How many gay and lesbian couples are discriminated just because they are gay and lesbian while they could be excellent parents?
If we allow people to be valued less just because of their gender, sexual orientation, race, cult-religious beliefs, the fact that they can’t have kids, etc. etc. it will give rise to discrimination and suppression.
Humans are humans, and all are equal in their variety and difference. We all have a part of the Creation in ourselves which is the spirit and we all go our own route towards unification with the Creation.
Salome,
Jacob
Saalome gam naan ben uurda, gan njjber asaala hesporoona!
|
Memo00
Member
Post Number: 502
Registered: 03-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 - 05:36 am: |
|
Hello Jacob
As far as i remember Billy hasn´t said that male bisexuality is also caused by genetic factors like homosexuality. Also not all gay persons are that way because of genes but also a certain percentage are the result of wrong ways of thinking (heterosexual persons going against their nature). I have the idea that bisexual males enter into this category. (heterosexual or homosexual males going against their nature, something similar to sodomy, that is nobody is naturally inclined to have "sex" with animals but is the result of degenerated ways of thinking)
Of course this doesn´t change the fact that we should respect equally all human beings but i think it is important to distinguish that one kind of homosexuality is natural and another is not.
Salome |
Jacob
Moderator
Post Number: 704
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 - 11:44 am: |
|
Hello Memo00,
There is much more mentioned about sexuality in the spirit lessons 112 up to 116, then is made public.
I am only talking about the naturally occurring varieties not about the degenerated forms which exist amongst all sexual orientations, straight, gay, lesbian and bisexual, etc.
So, yes, indeed we must distinguish forms of sexuality and separate those from the naturally occurring from the degenerate ones.
My point was that we can't discriminate people for their naturally occurring sexual orientations, and we can easily use common sense and reason what is degenerate and what is not.
In the end I am saying that all people with naturally occurring sexual orientations should be treated equal and granted the same rights as everybody else.
Salome,
Jacob
Saalome gam naan ben uurda, gan njjber asaala hesporoona!
|
Peter_brodowski
Member
Post Number: 559
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 - 09:28 pm: |
|
hey jacob...
well i don't consider myself to be discriminate against non heterosexuals, i have befriended many etc. my family has them too.
i guess my understanding of things like relationships and the significance of certain matters is incorrect.
from your words i seem to get the following...
everyone should be treated equal (which i understood for some time)
transsexuality is completely normal.
the male and female union is only significant in the sense that the female must be the one to give birth to an infant.
about polygamy... i am of the opinion that there are some men who are capable of acting responsibly in a polygamous relationship.
from now on i wont even bother concerning myself with anything in regards to relationships unless it pertains to me directly.
if i understand, life is one big free for all when it comes to sexual behaviour, with the exception of degenrate behaviour.
if i want to cut off my male genitals and take female hormones and consider myself a woman, that is okay.
if such varieties of actions are okay.. what is so wrong with a man being in a multiple woman relationship to satisfy his sexual cravings?
not that i agree that a man should be with more than one woman simply to get his kicks so to speak.
can you help me understand why transexuality is acceptable beahviour and why a man who seeks multiple fmeales for a so called "sexual advantage"?
thanks jacob. where shoud we take this conversation in regards to topic area in the forum? |
Jacob
Moderator
Post Number: 705
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2011 - 12:11 am: |
|
On this planet things like trans-sexuality, male homosexuality are for this time an normal occurrence, which does not mean it won’t or can’t change.
Also when a transsexual undergoes a sex-change, this is not an easy decision, but takes years to take and execute.
Even when I would mention something (for some) very controversial that male homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality in both genders in the future can be neutralized if the person wishes to do so, by means of genetic normalization and psychotherapeutic treatment.
Nevertheless it would be a free choice and if a person decides that he lives just fine with that, then that is ok.
The upmost recommendation of this time is first to be human and understand that there are many varieties of people, it is so easy to discriminate those who are different.
The marriage between a man and woman is the basic building-block of the smallest possible WE-form, which is a polygamist marriage, of one man and several wives.
We are no way near ready for this, since it’s much more then satisfying mutual sexual needs, but also material-consciousness-related and spiritual development amongst them all, neither men nor women are ready for this.
Also, look around you, is the current humanity ready for this? Many thousands of years of false believes are not easily neutralized, even if there would be people ready for this, the vast majority isn’t, especially since the vast majority still does not have a clue about true love, spiritual development, etc.
Salome,
Jacob
Saalome gam naan ben uurda, gan njjber asaala hesporoona!
|
Michael_horn
Member
Post Number: 421
Registered: 07-2009
| | Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2011 - 02:30 pm: |
|
I think we can also say that a person's sex is not changed, as in teh male-female chromosomes. Only their appearance, along with whatever behaviors they associate with such a change. |
Sitkaa
Member
Post Number: 503
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, July 15, 2011 - 04:34 am: |
|
Everyone is entitled to a unique approach to sexuality. For some sexuality follows formulae, a little bit of this, a dash of that, and voila!, sex happens. For others, sex is to be explored - as in trying out 'perversion' for awhile. And then for others sex is entirely in their own heads.. and they end up falling off the reservation, and believing their own fantastical fantasies.
Sex is an individual thing, and we all need the space to actualize it for ourselves. Or even naught.
Fur leben.
|
Sitkaa
Member
Post Number: 505
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, July 15, 2011 - 12:11 pm: |
|
My apologies, I didn't directly say what what I was tryin to get at, so let me try again.
We are searching for ideals in this FIGU org, trying to manifest the best way to be, this is true in terms of sexuality as much as in so many other spaces in our lives. For ourselves we may discern an ideal, a most natural way to be, for instance. but how can we possibly determine this for someone else? You can never truly know what someone else is goin through, why they are the way they are. We can uphold ideals all day long, but fall flat on our faces when we apply such ideals to anyone else. All we can really say is that as long as you aren't hurtin anyone else, you're free to grow your own way.
Of course the monogamous heterosexual relationship is the ideal, however, this is EARTH, and ideals are only approachable here, especially psychological ones. If ya watch television, or read the common literature of the day, it would seem that 90% of the population of our planet has some kinda sexual angst to work through here. If you isolate yourself like a long haired country boy, well then that ain't natural neither.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjaqrL7Kzj8
I spose I post this because I can see how quickly and easily people fall into judgment where it ain't due.
Fur leben.
|
Edward
Member
Post Number: 2130
Registered: 05-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, July 17, 2011 - 03:33 am: |
|
Hi Memo...
Just a couple of pennies....
As far as I read and know, it is Generically related: passing it down to your
offspring.
Once the Gene is generated, it can be passed down to the children...and it
would be HOW they cope with the Gene; having a strong Psyche to 'resist' the
Gene in it's working, or not. Just up to each individuals...how he/she cope
with it; make it manifest in Slumber/Inactive, or just Activate it and make
full use of it and than, manifesting the individuals as (Bi)Homosexual, or
whatever other tendency, which flows forth...
Remember, Jmmanuel and Billy did mentioned the Power of the human Body And
Spirit; which is able to generate what ever it wishes...when it gets to the
point. And once a certain Gene is generated and created, no way to get rid of
it; perhaps only, through genetically engineering/manipulation.
The Plejarans removed the mentioned Gene, and thus no Homosexuality (or
related) exist within their society.
I mentioned in the past, here...of an American or Canadian brain researcher
whom made this Gene known, some decades ago, and so his findings Truly,
correspond to what the Plajarans and Billy have stated all along.
Edward. |
Bobby
Member
Post Number: 11
Registered: 03-2011
| | Posted on Monday, July 18, 2011 - 04:39 am: |
|
Where and how was the Jewish race started? |
Edward
Member
Post Number: 2131
Registered: 05-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2011 - 12:38 am: |
|
Hi Bobby....
Welcome to the FIGU board....
Being Jewish, is NOT a Race or People!
They are followers of the Jewish Faith/Religion. Studying their Jewish
scrolls, which is their Bibles; mostly, in a number of volumes. [Which also
contain many Falsehoods in Word and History, etc....; thanks to the(ir) Self
Proclaimed (Jewish) priests, in those really times....]
The Israelites, became Jews...thus: Jewish. Their conviction Cult Religion is
also known as, Judaism.
Edward. |
|
