- Mysteries of Initiation
- The Debt Problem
- Keys Writings, Part 1
- Keys Writings, Part 2
- Keys Writings, Part 3
- Keys Writings, Part 4
- Keys Writings, Part 5
- Keys Writings, Part 6
- Keys Writings, Part 7
- 103 Favorite Quotes
- Understanding Illusion
- Djwhal Khul Predictions
- A Principle: Like Attracts Like
- The Search for Unity
- Anwar al-Awlaki Discussion
- Keys Writings, Part 8
- Keys Writings, Part 9
- Keys Writings, Part 10
- Keys Writings, Part 11
- Keys Writings, Part 12
- THE LAW OF REBIRTH
- MOLECULAR RELATIONSHIPS
- Ye Are Gods
- The Gathering of Lights
- Fundamental Doctrines
- The Molecular Business
- Keys Writings, Part 13
- Keys Writings, Part 14
- Keys Writings, Part 15
- Keys Writings, Part 16
- Keys Writings, Part 17
- Keys Writings, Part 18
- Keys Writings, Part 19
- Keys Writings, Part 20
Sarah Palin & Paul Revere
June 8, 2011
The media, which has a very elementary and sound bite knowledge of history attacked Sarah Palin unmercifully as an idiot, but now it appears that they are the idiots because a little research reveals her statements on Paul Revere and the British were correct.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view.bg?articleid=1343353 http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2011/06/06/sarah-palin-was-right-\ about-paul-revere http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2730566/posts
June 12, 2011
Here is a letter I just submitted to my local paper. I hope to have another post for my book ready for you tomorrow.
There are now two main quotes given out by the ignorant in an attempt to portray Sarah Palin as an idiot.
First many are still using the quote attributed to Palin: “I can see Russia from my house.”
A Zogby poll showed that 86.9% of Obama voters believe this even though it originated with Tina Fey on Saturday Night Live.
Here is what Sarah actually said: “You can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska.”
This statement is 100% true. I learned this over 50 years ago in grade school.
Recently Palin made the statement that Paul Revere warned the British about the rebels. The media universally jumped on her.
Not so fast. When Revere was captured by the British he did warn them. He told them of the army’s movement from Boston, and that British army troops would be in danger if they approached Lexington, because of hostile militia gathered there. He was attempting to misdirect them but he did warn them just as Palin said.
Since it is now common knowledge Sarah was correct I was disappointed to see the editorial cartoon in today’s (June 10th) paper making fun of Sarah for being wrong on this.
Re: Lucid Dreaming
June 12, 2011
Blayne > I know that DK talks about continuity of consciousness and how when mastered it will change the whole process of death and take the mystery out of it and change the way we die etc. He says to start practising to maintain consciousness during sleep. >
JJ Yes, DK was talking about continuity of consciousness on the mental plane, not the astral where dreams occur. At sleep our mental self leaves the body and the astral remains. Dreams are produced by the emotional body – this explains why they usually make no sense and you have little power of decision within them.
With Lucid dreaming one forces some consciousness from the mental plane to enter the astral, but this may sacrifice something you were attempting to do on the mental plane.
When the mental self returns on awakening we usually remember nothing it did, but only a few astral dreams. The only way to attain continuity of consciousness is to assiduously apply exercises like DK recommends. If something important is realized on the mental plane during sleep you will attempt to send yourself a message through the dream state so some dreams do have messages. If it is important you will have a serious feeling about the importance of a dream.
June 15, 2011
Mary Ellen wrote: I have always had the impression that JJ did not believe Global Warming to be true or viable. I guess I’m wrong, but I DO believe it’s a scam to distract us.
JJ I have always said I believe what the data reveals until better data comes along and have stated a number of times that the earth has warmed about one degree in the last 100 years according to land based measurements. Most global warming skeptics agree with this.
However, I have always been against the global warming alarmists who think this is the end of the world. I think the warming we have had so far has been a good thing. One degree warmer is much better than one degree colder.
I also think most of the warming and cooling is related to natural cycles with human activity contributing some, but not as much as the alarmists say.
I’ve also said that CO2 is a fertilizer and a certain amount of increase will make for a greener healthier planet.
The one thing that should cause some alarm is the decrease of oxygen in our atmosphere, but you do not hear much about that.
I’ve also stated somewhere that we are more likely to be entering a cooling cycle than a warmer one.
Re: Molecular Business
June 17, 2011
Larry Woods says,
The greatest problem with a corporation is their myopic interest in profit only. So they seem perfectly willing to make sweetheart deals with government giving them special privileges of all kinds such as tax breaks, pollution allowances, and much more. Another difficulty is lack of liability. No owners (shareholders) ever incur any liability if the corporation poisons a bunch of folks or destroys an entire river ecosystem or some other evil thing. How would a molecular business do any better?
JJ The design of the Molecular Business is to first create a more efficient business model that will make a good profit. The second is to put all employees into a more equal relationship and pay. This is done through free will and not force, as today’s liberals so desire. Because the business is employee owned they will be more flexible. If they all have to take a pay cut to survive they can take this action or give themselves a raise if there is more profit.
As far as insuring virtuous actions by the corporation there is never any guarantee of that but the Molecular Business should be more constructive and less destructive than most because:
(1) All employees have a voice and if the leaders get too destructive the will be voted out and replaced.
(2) Because the company is employee owned there will be a greater sense of responsibility to make good decisions.
(3) As the spiritual molecules grow leaders in the Molecular Businesses will draw from them. These people will have service to humanity as their objective.
Larry: What is the “bottom line” for the molecular business? Profit?
JJ Profit is the prime objective of any business. If a business cannot make a profit then it cannot even exist.
Because all employees will be a part of the business I do not expect tem to go for a profit at any price but to make a profit doing constructive work.
Larry: Profit-only gives today’s corporations that vacant stare that everyone hates so much.
JJ Modern corporations are not perfect but the hatred you speak of is mostly based in illusion. Many people of today are like programmed robots that do not think for themselves. They need to be educated.
I do not recall any private corporation ever taking anything from me that I didn’t want to give them once in my entire life yet government does this every day
Larry If a customer slips and falls at the porch of the retail building, does the molecular business take liability?
JJ Of course – a Molecular Business would have to have liability insurance just like any other company.
Larry: Or do they employ the tricks of traditional corporations to avoid responsibility?
JJ Such things are usually handled by the insurance company rather than the business. And the gouging works both ways. Consumers will often fake injuries and pretend they are worse than they are to get an undeserved settlement.
Larry That one incident could potentially wipe them out, especially when they are small before much growth.
JJ That’s why you have insurance.
Larry: If the workers are also owners, then they will end up personally liable for every problem when they go to court? Are the workers not real owners but merely stock holders?
JJ They are owners through the holding of stock. That does not make them personally liable any more than employees in other corporations.
Larry If so, then when the Molecular Business hires new workers, must they buy in? JJ A new employee starts out with no stock but receives stock as a bonus as time goes on or he can purchase it.
Larry: If the Molecular Business hires hirelings instead of shareholders and then some founders retire or get disabled or for whatever reason stop working but remain as shareholders, then over time it will just be another corporation with hirelings and separate shareholders.
JJ It was always designed to be like a regular corporation as far as stock is concerned except part of the pay to employees will be in stock. If someone retires and wants to hold on to their stock that is good for the company because it gives them more cash to work with.
Larry: So what does a “harmless” Molecular Business do about the general idea of liability and of new workers and of new compared to retired workers or shareholders or owners?
JJ As I said, it would have insurance. If the company does wrong it could get sued just like any other company.
Larry: Competition. I know the Molecular Business will face competition no matter what their product(s). When they are small this will not amount to much of a problem. But when their shoes or product(s) begin to compete with Nike or some other huge corporation, the big guy will take steps to disable them or to undercut them. For example, the British counterfeited the Continental dollars until the entire value of it amounted to nothing. Any large corporation will start negative and often unethical steps to undercut the competition such as ads defiling the brand name and do any number of other dirty tricks. They will pay off their Congressmen they bought to add excessive new taxes onto the Molecular Business. They will undercut in many unexpected ways because they are big and you are small and they don’t want you horning in. How will the Molecular Business respond to big competition?
JJ Just like the smaller businesses do today. You create a better product and have better service. I’ve been a small business owner most of my life and there are many advantages to being small as well as big. Some small business get destroyed through various practices of large companies but the good ones survive. Steve Jobs started Apple in his garage and no one stopped him. Bill Gates started Microsoft on a shoestring and IBM helped him get started by selling him DOS at a bargain price.
I’m not worried about big business. Government always concerns me though.
June 17, 2011
I heard this guy on Coast to Coast and his story is pretty amazing. He posts a picture of him at the Gettysburg address. You can see it here: http://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/basiago-s-time-travel-photo Click on the photo to enlarge.
This guy either has a heck of an imagination or a great story. The chances that we mastered time travel in the 60s is pretty slim, even if it were possible but it’s a fun story to follow.
I’ve also enjoyed following John Titor. He was close enough on some predictions to be eerie.
The Beast’s Influence on the Organic Food and Alternative Medicine Movem June 28, 2011
Good post Rob.
It was an interesting idea to use a taste test on organic and non organic foods, but there are several problems with Penn & Tellers experiment.
(1) There is not a lot of difference in taste in apples or bananas no matter how they are grown. These were the worst fruits to use for the test and probably why Penn & Teller used them. Strawberries would have been much better.
(2) A Lot of commercial organic farms do not put many minerals back in the soil and have less nutrition than the non organic. If Penn & Teller picked their fruit from a highly commercialized organic farm then it probably wouldn’t taste any better than non organic.
Strawberries or watermelons would have provided a lot better taste test as these have a huge difference in taste as the quality goes up. If these are raised in quality live soil with lots of minerals the taste will be very different than the highly commercialized fruit.
(3) How fresh the fruit is also makes a huge difference in taste. I notice that a lot of organic food for sale looks quite old and thus would have low nutritional value and not much taste. JJ
June 29, 2011
Thought I’d make a few comments on some recent posts;
JC I do not disagree with this, the operative word being “PRIMARILY”, but what I then like to know if for all the males who are now in the gathering, listening to JJ teach, which energy are you operating in male or female energy?
JJ Males can definitely be in the female position and females in the male. In the days of Jesus the disciples were female to Jesus, but then Jesus was female to the Christ who overshadowed him.
The fact that one is in a male or female body only indicates that over the course of a lifetime that he or she will be more in the energy represented by his body than its opposite. But within certain cycles of that life he will be in his opposite energy.
Dan: A Course In Miracles states that there is no order or difference in miracles.
What this means, then, is that it is just as easy to heal a cancer as it is to heal a mild headache. It is just as easy to heal a threat of nuclear war as it is to heal an argument between two little kids, because they are all the same thing. They all stem from one center point, which is the belief in separation or the belief in guilt. The problems are never out there in the world, but within our minds.”
JJ ACIM has a strange approach to this. It is obvious that it is more difficult to perform the miracle of bringing peace on earth to the world than healing a headache. But the book tells us that this world is not real and if we find the true reality the world just disappears and then peace on earth is no longer a problem because there is no earth. This seems like an escapist solution as not even the writer of ACIM had the earth disappear for her. If we had an ACIM reader just disappear from this illusion now and then this statement would have more credibility.
JC JJ has said that after we start forming stable molecules, we will need to experiment with different types of molecules with different numbers for different purposes. They will have different numbers of members, and perhaps different mixtures of energies. I would love to be a scientist studying all of this. Maybe we could try an all male molecule and balance it off with an all female molecule, and study them to find out if they serve any useful purpose. That’s just one idea. Another one might be to have 10 male-female couples, one female-female couple and one male-male couple. I’m just speculating. There are probably a lot of combinations that could be tried. An important point to consider is that for people who choose to participate in these experiments, we are literally messing with their lives and their spiritual connections, and great care must be taken to assist them. Also, the participant must be able to let go of their ego, for the greater good.
JJ Seekers will be experimenting with all kinds of combinations. Some will prove to be working molecules with certain qualities and some will not.
All combinations of humans working for he same goal create personality energy, but a molecule will create soul energy and there will be a big difference between the two. Remember to draw down the soul molecular energy the group must be accepted by the Master in charge.
John Lennon a Conservative?
June 30. 2011
In the Lost Key of the Buddha it was stated that1ohn Lennon was to become a spokesman for a new round of conservatism, but he was killed before he fulfilled his destiny. Many thought that this was far fetched because he seemed so ingrained in the liberal mindset.
Now some evidence has come out that he was turning conservative before he died. Take a look.
Re: belief -> faith
July 1, 2011
Here are some previous comments I have made on faith in the past. The quintessential definition is given in Hebrews 11. When using the Greek one can see that Paul’s definition of faith corresponds very closely with the one I have given.
In the New Testament faith comes from PISTIS which is derived from the root word PEITHO which basically means “to prove a thing true or false by evidence, argument, reason or experiment and through the guidance of your inner authority.”
Those who boast of great religious faith remind me a lot of a neophyte in a multi-level marketing program. When entering the program they are pumped full of zeal by various distributors. I have met many of those individuals who think they are going to make a million dollars or so in the next year and they have unshakable faith that this will happen. But sooner or later hard facts and reality hits them and they realize that to be even moderately successful they will have to devote all their extra energies and efforts to this “part time” business. When faced with this hard fact over ninety per cent lose interest and drop away. Often, I have met one of these individuals at a later time and asked how their venture was going. Generally, they want to change the subject.
So the born again full-fledged gospel believing Bible thumping proselyter who does not want to apply work, will want to change the subject when his faith is put to the test. If he reads his Bible perhaps this scripture will glare him in the face: “He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool.” Proverbs 28:26
Those with unworkable faith merely trust in their heart, or their feelings, which is not faith at all. “Faith” comes from the Greek PISTIS and literally means: “a mental conviction one has proven true by argument or reason”. Thus if one has faith he will go to heaven he should be able to justify it by logical argumentation. One will notice that Paul, a big believer in faith, spent much of his time in logical argumentation.
The book of Hebrews gives an expanded definition: “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Hebrews 11:1
We can again find that the Greek will give us a much clearer translation here. “Substance” comes from HUPOSTASIS and in modern translations it is usually rendered “assurance” or “confidence”, but in reality one English word cannot do it justice. It more literally means “That state of mind which supports an idea through a sustained effort.” “Evidence” comes from ELEGECHOS which means “to prove a matter true or false”. The word indicates that faith establishes the true reality. Thus a clearer translation of the preceding verse would be: “Now faith is having that state of mind which sustains that which is hoped for and reveals the truth of those things we do not see.” This definition corresponds much better with the root meaning of the Greek PISTIS which is translated faith.
If we have faith we can sustain an idea until it is proven true or false. It is never a blind unreasoning belief.
The correct definition of faith should make the word more acceptable to the more enlightened and intelligent persons who were previously repulsed to using it. We see that Edison, for instance, had great faith. He sustained the idea of the light bulb until he proved its validity by making it a physical reality. When faith is sustained on a true principle a physical manifestation occurs. “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed.” Hebrews 11:3
We are also told: “But without faith, it is impossible to please Him” (God). Hebrews 11:6 Unless we can sustain an idea or conviction and prove it by argument or externalization we cannot please God.
By this scriptural definition of faith, I know of very few pious religious people who have any semblance of faith, but ironically, there are numerous non-religious people who have it.
If those who claim to have faith do not actually have it, then what do they have? After searching through numerous words in the Biblical Greek the closest I can find to match what is commonly miscalled “faith” is BLASPHEMOS which in the English means “blasphemer”.. BLASPHEMOS literally means “to hinder by stating an unfounded, rumored, or unreasonable statement”. Interestingly, most of those who claim to have faith cannot support their belief with any logical foundation or reasoning, but merely repeat what they have been taught. Therefore, instead of having faith they are committing blasphemy.
Copyright 2011 by J J Dewey