Tag: human molecule

Molecular Questions

Joseph Dewey
This entry is part 11 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted July 22, 2010
Ruth wrote:
Jesus’ Molecule was Himself as the Conduit for the higher entity and energies, plus 12 men and 12 women. Never forget the female energies in these molecules wherein 1 + 1 = one, or one negative and one positive, or one male/sending and one female/receiving, and yes, that can also mean one gay male and one female or vice versa, as long as the energies balance out to a degree where one sends and one receives, like an electrical current.

John C
I have a request and a question.

(1) Request. When we discuss electrical current in the world of physics, we can diagram the flow of electricity in any electrical current, whether it be a simple flashlight or a complex computer. In fact, we could take any energy system and draw a diagram with little arrows showing the flow of positive and negative energy. What I would like to see is an energy diagram of a human molecule. This shouldn’t be too difficult to accomplish, since a molecule is based on simple electrical principles. We can diagram the basic electrical flows in an atom, or a chemical molecule, or even the human body. AAB’s books contain what could be considered diagrams of the flow of energy between members of the hierarchy, and between all the human vehicles. I’ve even seen electrical flow diagrams of the chakras within the human body. How about an electrical flow diagram for a human molecule?

Start off with the flow of energy in a molecular relationship. Expand that into the energy flow within each atomic unit, among all the atomic units, the flow of the energy of soul contact, the flow of energy between the molecule and the higher life which in habits the molecule, and the flow of energy between the molecule and the higher molecule with which it is linked. Have I left anything out?

This whole concept might be easier to understand, and easier for people like me to accept once these basic flows are understood through a physical, scientific diagram.

JJ
This has been available for a long time.  You can see how the lines of force work in the following diagram:

The initiating unit is overshadowed bringing in the spiritual flow from the hierarchy.

John then projects us into a possible future where gay marriage is accepted by the majority and is no longer controversial.  Then he says:

Suppose that the Keys is growing, and human molecules are being formed. They are attracting peoples’ attention as more and more obtain soul contact and seek to organize themselves along this order. You have to know that some gay couples are going to be attracted to this as well and will want to join a molecule, but they are forbidden to join unless they take on a female working partner.

JJ
This is not true.  Take a look at the diagram of the expanding molecule  and you will see the twenty-four entities and associate single members.  All these members can be male or female gay or straight as long as they show evidence of soul contact and are willing to work toward balancing the energy of the whole.

I think the misunderstanding you have is that you are seeing a partnership in the molecule as being similar to a marriage or an emotional/romantic one and it is not.  Partners can be married or romantically attached, but that is only for convenience sake.  The purpose of working together is not to enhance relationship between two romantic couples, but to balance the energy so the spiritual electricity can flow bringing in higher purpose.

To accomplish this the zero point must be approached by each unit. If it turns out that a straight female is sending to her straight male partner then a change must be made so she is receiving, else the couple will not be able to approach the zero point and will cause resistance to energy. This does  not mean they are not good enough, but it means they are in their wrong place for lowering resistance. Even so, two male gays are both in male bodies that have a positive charge.  It takes a negative charge to lower the resistance of the male in the molecule so the couple will either have to be associate members or take a female partner they can send to.  This has nothing to do with their romantic relationship.  In fact it will enhance it if they are in tune with their souls for when the group achieves soul contact as a unit they will move closer to each other as well as the other members.

For example, when we meet at gatherings it makes no difference to me whether my wife is next to me as the energy flows or on the other side of the circle.  What matters is the lowering of resistance to the spiritual flow. We do not create a molecule there but we do bring in some spiritual energy and always align male/female as much as possible.

You can’t just look at a proton and pronounce it an electron.  No matter what you do it will still have a positive charge and the electron will remain negative.  To make things work we have to accept the principles that govern energy and then work with them.  If a thing works then it will not matter whether people thought it was politically incorrect.  Once a working model is demonstrated it is only a matter of time before it is accepted.

John C
If you don’t know many gay people, especially men, you may be as surprised as I was to find that there is a higher percentage of seekers and spiritually-minded people than in the population at large.

JJ
I wouldn’t be surprised though I care not to make a tabulation.  There are other gays on this list besides you, for instance and they are very insightful.

John C
Also, if you look at “societal evolution” (as Rush calls it), Blacks and Gays are usually at the forefront.

JJ
I don’t look at any one group or race on the forefront.  We are all in this together and you never know where the next surge will take place.

John c
And, if JJ’s teaching’s ever reach the mass consciousness, the most spiritually-minded among us are likely to be the earliest adopters, and this could become a big question when these people start looking for something, and are told that they can’t have it, or perceive that they are being sent that same old message that they are just not “good enough”. That might not be the message you intended to send, but that is how that message will be received.

JJ
No.  That is not the message that is intended to be sent and it is not the message being sent.  If any perceive it that way it is because they need to understand how the Molecular Relationship works.  No one is judged as being good or evil by their race or place of energy. We’ve gone through this before and I’m surprised you are bringing it up again.  Hopefully we can clarify this time.

John C
Thinking people, both gay and straight, are going to wonder how come same both gay and straight married couples are seen as equal in society, but not in a human molecule.

JJ
Again where do you get this convoluted idea??? I have said nothing that should give you this thought.

John C
People are going to look on the human molecule the same way people look at fundamentalist religions today, with their doctrines of wifely submission to husbands based on “infallible Biblical teachings”.

JJ
If the molecule actually works they will study why it works and then only go with what makes it work.  Would you create something that looks like a light bulb but then does not turn on?  Political correctness has nothing to do with the light bulb working or whether people will accept it if it works.

Pages: 1 2

Reflections on John

Joseph Dewey
This entry is part 32 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Aug 26, 2010
John C quotes me:
“This is true on a broader scale. Those beginners on the Path may relate enlightening facts to those farther along than themselves, but they can never directly teach them principles. Principles are only passed down from higher to lower. If any of us achieve enlightenment on any principle, it is either inspired by a person who is further along the path than ourselves or from our Higher Selves. What we are saying here is, in fact, a principle: enlightenment proceeds from the top down, never from the bottom up.”

I see things just a little differently.

It is possible to raise one’s consciousness so as to obtain a higher angle of vision and observe for oneself.

JJ
I don’t see how you see things differently at all.  If you raise your consciousness to a high enough angle of vision to understand a new principle then you are making some degree of soul contact and receiving assistance from your higher self.  We can come to many conclusions just using metal reflection, but such things deal with facts rather than principles.  Sounds like you are in harmony with my statement.

This statement you made demonstrates how you have received from higher than your lower nature:

“Whenever I went to church, or listened to a speech, or read a book, it was like there was a little narrative of the soul going on in my inner ear: “I know what that guy just said, but this is the truth.” I listened more to that inner voice, than I did to any outer voice….In a way, nobody learns things totally on their own.”

John C
And this explains my insistence that a male/male atomic unit would not hurt a Molecule.

JJ
It doesn’t explain it at all for you never created a molecule.  There hasn’t been a full working model since Christ was here 2000 years ago.

What you created was a spiritual group and a spiritual group creating group energy can be produced by any combination of people.

John C
But to say that all same-sex couples are not really married, can’t experience soul contact, and are incapable of forming a balanced atomic unit, does not fit in with the reality that I have experienced.

JJ
I never said that there cannot be soul contact in male male and female female relationships as you insinuate.   This happens all the time.  You are using the word “balanced” as in feeling in harmony together through the soul.  This is a totally different thing than balancing electrical charge.  You need to disagree with what I say, not with what I do not say.

John C
It just drives me nuts when so many people on the Keys appear to me to be so stuck on JJ that they can’t see anything or anybody else.

JJ
They do see a lot else and many members are attending other classes and reading a large assortment of books.  BUT they do not dwell on these other things because the Keys is set up as a classroom with me as the teacher.

Why does this drive you nuts???

Were you also driven nuts when you attended school and had to follow the agenda of the teacher.  When you were in a math class, did you want to talk about English?
I cannot imagine being driven nuts over anyone who has decided to teach a class no matter how wrong I think they are.  If the teacher does not know what he is talking about I wouldn’t be driven nuts, but would just not take the class.

If the teacher has something good to teach I would take the class and learn, but wouldn’t be driven nuts.

If the students were enthralled with the teacher and do not listen to a word I say -fine – that is their choice and has nothing to do me. I’ll still take what I can from the class and would not be driven nuts.

John C
Why does it bother me when people do that? Some people think it’s because I’m jealous and want attention, but that’s not true. All people want attention. That is perfectly normal. But, I DON’T want attention, but I would like to be at least taken seriously when I write something, and have it given at least some consideration. But, this is something I want for every member of the group.

JJ
It sounds like you are saying that you do not want attention but then turn around and telling us you want attention – or to be taken seriously which is the same thing.

John C
When I post, I don’t try to say the absolutely perfect truths, coming out of the mouth of God. I like to throw out an idea and have somebody else improve on it, then I say something to improve on their idea, and then somebody says something to improve that still further. This is the way Thom and I make decisions, and the way we teach each other truths, and it works great! Everybody gets to be the teacher. Everybody gets to be the student. Everybody sends. Everybody receives. This works great here at home, but it has never worked on the Keys.

JJ
Sounds like you are not looking for a classroom but one of the many loosely organized forums like Alex has created for example. Here on the Sealed Portion we are not set up as a classroom with a teacher but as a group where all can post with equal authority. This and others like it should be much more suited for your needs.

I like coming to forums such as this, but am also a member of a list with an acknowledged teacher like myself.  I wouldn’t think of complaining that no one listens to me there or in any other class.

John C
I don’t stand up on the mountain and throw down lightning bolts. My attitude is more like: come, let us reason together.

Perhaps I write things that most people aren’t interested in — like how overshadowing REALLY works, etc.

JJ
Maybe the group didn’t believe you REALLY know how it works.
John C
I have new principles or insights to offer the world, and I have taught many of them on the Keys, and I have mentioned some of them in this post.

JJ
I think we have a different understanding of principles for I haven’t seen you ever teach a new one.

That said, I thought I would end with a few comments that may be offensive to you, but if you can handle it then they will be helpful.

First, I do not think you are jealous of me as some accuse you of being.  I think you see yourself of at least my equal and therefore, in your mind, no jealousy is possible.

You complain that few on the Keys listen to you.  Here are the reasons for that.

(1) The Keys is set up as a classroom and as such the students came there to learn from the teacher – not a student competing with the teacher.

(2) In post after post you present yourself as a victim.  No one wants to learn from someone who feels like a victim.

(3) You are constantly on a soapbox about being gay.  We have a number of gays on the forum and they do not do this. If you were to equally talk about Scientology and how this made you a victim that would be equally annoying.

You are gay, fine.  I do not know a member of the Keys that has anything against gays.  Unless being gay has something to do with the agenda of the class or something being taught let’s move on.

(4) You regularly give us hints that you have special knowledge that we are unprepared for. This makes some see you as presenting yourself as a superior to the rest of us without giving us any evidence.

(5) You present yourself on the Keys as if you have a right to be listened to and understood.  No one has that right including myself.

(6) You regularly hint that you disagree with me but rarely give anything with clarity that defines the disagreement. This sometimes makes it look like you are disagreeing just to be disagreeing or to take me down a notch.

(7) Even though you say you are free from the beast you seem to think your teachings should be accepted on the Keys because of who you were in past lives (which you’ve hinted at) and/or some type of divine authority you inherently possess. I doubt if you can see this in yourself, but I can guarantee you that others have this impression.

Sorry to be so blunt with you but I think it is time to confront you with these points and they can be helpful if examined with the right attitude.

Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey