The Arthurian Maji Grail King Lineage - Page 6

path_of_one · 07-10-2008, 06:11 PM

Exactly, Dondi. Cells' DNA holds information, not memories. Memories, in the sense of "I remember when great-grandma celebrated her 90th birthday and we had a huge chocolate cake" are remembered in the brain and has nothing to do with DNA. DNA codes for when/how to have the body do stuff. What stuff to assemble for growth, development, maintenance.

As for generating thoughts, are you proposing that all thoughts come from elsewhere, Marietta? Isn't it possible we just think up something? Are all thoughts indicative of truth coming to us from somewhere in the universe? There's a whole lot of fantasy and sci-fi novels out there that aren't much different in scope or creativity from what you are proposing in the OP with the feline hominids and the nephilim and etc. Are you saying all these authors are picking up on some great truths out there? The human brain can create ideas- can generate storylines. Most of it actually IS based on stuff it heard from elsewhere, but reorganized. But we are capable of original thoughts. Not sure how that makes those thoughts grounded in reality. They might be, and they might not be.

As an aside, as apparent from your OP, your ideas (or the ideas presented) are not actually original thoughts. As I, Brian points out- they are ideas pulled from a wide variety of religions and mystery traditions and smooshed together in a smorgasbord of stuff. That isn't parroting, but it isn't exactly thinking things up on your own, is it? Most of storytelling, art, and human thought works this way- we take a bit of this and that, reinterpret, retell the story, create with the bits left over from others.

Just the fact that this happens is completely insufficient for evidence whether our ideas, stories, etc. have anything to do with reality or truth. Our brains are entirely capable of coming up with all sorts of scenarios, and attaching all kinds of warm fuzzy feelings to them. That doesn't mean it is actually the case.

My overall point is- this may work for you as a belief system, but to make such fantastic claims as extra or modified DNA, special powers, feline hominids (which you've never addressed, by the way), nephilim, angelics, etc. and to claim this is grounded in science... that is where it goes from belief system to completely unsubstantiated storytelling.

Dondi · 07-10-2008, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by path_of_one

My overall point is- this may work for you as a belief system, but to make such fantastic claims as extra or modified DNA, special powers, feline hominids (which you've never addressed, by the way), nephilim, angelics, etc. and to claim this is grounded in science... that is where it goes from belief system to completely unsubstantiated storytelling.

Seems like the stuff of dreams.

China Cat Sunflower · 07-11-2008, 12:15 AM

I dunno. As far fetched as some of this stuff seems, it isn't that different from how Christianity was invented out of altered and embellished artifacts from other traditions. Look how Christianity baldly inserts its avatar into the foundational myths of Judaism. That's outrageous! Islam does the same by appropriating Abraham's ******* son Ishmael as its patriarch. Heck, the Bahia's scab off all three.

I remember one poster who claimed to be a vampire. I remember she said something about "...in the vampire community, blah blah blah...". I found that humorous! The vampire community indeed! But everybody wants to identify with some kind of cool, identity providing, thing. It's some kind of Borg hive programming, I swear! Then again, it's not that different from just reading historical fiction. You're already acting it out in your head, so why not your body as well? Why not make a personal religion out of it? After all, that's how at least two of the three monotheistic biggies started out.

Chris

Marietta · 07-11-2008, 12:25 AM

Dear bananabrain,
You wrote:
as dana carvey's "church lady" would have put it, "how convenient".

My reply: I have told you how I was translating the hebrew without all the rules and told you that I found Physics in the text and that when I started studying Physics I already knew it. What more do you want? You don't understand how someone could possibly understand something from the methods I have used, so what is the point of continuing with this topic. I know the method I used to study and I know what I gained from it, plain and simple. As stated my form of learning isn't up for discussion. I'm here to discuss Indigo's and Keylontic Science, two topics you know nothing about. So why are you trying to debate in this thread?

You wrote:
hmmm. no, sorry, this sounds like the most egregious case of confirmation bias i have ever struck. "cellular memory", my bottom.

My reply: Label it whatever you wish, it doesn't change the "FACT" that I knew things that I had not studied about Physics and other forms of science before studying it.
How do you explain these kids and what they know? Where does the knowledge come from if not from cellular memory, it wasn't taught: She sees the images in her head and then paints them. The second is of a little blind girl who can play classical music after hearing only once.

YouTube - Akiane Kramarik, Spiritual Young Artist, BR-PT subtitles

YouTube - Yeh Eun - the 5 year old Blind pianist Genius

My Nephew at the age of two (now 30) went to his father sitting at the computer and asked to play on the computer. Back then the computers were all in dos language. His father told him that he had to be big enough to read to be able to play on the computer. A little while later he came to his father with the encyclopedia and read a page to him. He had never been taught the most base of knowledge about reading, alphabet or so on.
Where did this knowledge come from?
My child used to work in a preschool (1-2 year olds) and one day she put the kids names a piece of paper and tacked them to a board at the end of the day she took them down. The next day one little boy picked up the pile of names and read. When the mother and father came to pick this child up and was asked who taught her to read the parents said that nobody did and that they had no idea she could do this.
Where did this memory come from?
I could sight case after case and it all points to cellular memory. How do you explain genius, prodigy, gifted or whatever you wish to call it?

You wrote: a lamed vav-nik is a righteous person, a saint. if s/he is special, it is not because of "special powers" or "extra DNA", it is because s/he has attained a higher spiritual level through the most rigorous and testing self-discipline, which you can read about in texts such as the "tanya", the "palm tree of deborah" or the "path of the righteous". what you are talking about is pure fiction.

My reply: What is the purpose of the 36 lahmed vav niks? Why are there always 36 here, not 37, not 35? If they are merely righteous people why on 36?
Define how you are using the term righteous?

Love and Light, Marietta

bgruagach · 07-11-2008, 01:56 AM

I'm an elementary school teacher (kindergarten through grade 6). Children are amazing sponges, absorbing all sorts of information and learning all the time.

Language, particularly written language, is around us constantly in most English-speaking communities. It's on TV, it's on product packaging, it's on street signs. Most families have at least a few books, magazines, or newspapers lying around the house that kids can pick up (perhaps when adults aren't paying attention!)

Kids who tend to pick up reading quickly, early, or apparently "on their own" usually come from homes where the adults are more on the literate side of things (having plenty of books, magazines, etc. lying around, constantly reading themselves so kids see that reading is interesting). The adults in these homes tend to also be verbally sophisticated and talk in complete sentences. Kids are listening even when adults don't think they are! My point is that the brain gets "primed" for reading in literate, verbally sophisticated environments so healthy normally developing children quite often will learn to read quite easily and often on their own. It's all about being in an enriched environment and having the opportunity to learn (regardless if the adults are actively trying to teach reading or not).

There's no need to try and explain it with extraordinary theories when perfectly normal, observable, simple explanations will cover it. And I think we are perhaps not giving kids the credit they are due by suggesting that they couldn't have learned to read on their own when in a literate, verbal environment with lots of opportunity except as the result of some sort of exceptional "homo superior" theory. Kids are not stupid.

Marietta · 07-11-2008, 02:25 AM

sorry this was a double post

Marietta · 07-11-2008, 02:27 AM

Cells and DNA are not one and the same. Where do you suppose memories stored? It has been proven through studies done on a set of conjoined twins who are joined at the head and share one brain, that the brain does not hold the memory, or the personality traits. Each of the conjoined twins have very distance personalities, with very different memories.

I'm not sure where you could have gotten the idea that I am even slightly suggesting that our thoughts come from an outside source. All that exists is energy and energy is conscious, thus all that exists is conscious, from a quirk to a human. The only difference in a table and a human is the amount of energy/conscious holding capacity. A table can't self realize or analyze. We definitely are capable of 'ORIGINAL' thought even though most of us chose to simply follow what we are told instead of using our own innate minds to come to our own conclusion. All that exists is merely thought forms. Reality is in the eye of the beholder, isn't it. Lets say that I live in China and you live in England but you have never visited China. One day someone tries to tell you about a place they visited called China and you deny that it exists because you personally have never been there to verify it, "Does that mean that China does not exist for me?" No, it is very real to me and is part of my everyday reality.
I can see subtle energy which makes it part of my reality but someone who can't see these subtle energies would argue that they are not real, but that doesn't negate the validity of them.
What ideas have I claimed to be original? If you reread my post you will see that what I said was that I had knowledge without ever studying a topic (not that the knowledge was new, but it was new to me) that I derived from a very crude translation of the Hebrew text of Torah. Such as knowledge of advanced Quantum physics. How did I know this very complicated form of science without reading or studying about it? Where did this knowledge come from? How does a child prodigy know what he/she knows. How can a two year old who has never been taught how to read or write pick up a book and read it? How can a five year old blind child who has never had a music lesson play classical music on the piano after hearing the song only one time? and on and on and on.
How can a person with Autism look at a bag of M&M's and tell you exactly how many there are in the bag?

It sounds like you are of the mind set that we can't think for ourselves and can only memic what someone else tells us. If this is so where do you think it all began? Someone had to be able to think somewhere along the line to put it into "your" mind. Believe it or not, there are people who have original thoughts, that are real, valid productive thoughts and ideas that nobody else implanted into their minds.
Unsubstantiated for you but for a lot of people this is not the case.

Love and Light, Marietta

Marietta · 07-11-2008, 02:43 AM

Dear bgriagach, Thanks for the imput.
So are you saying that it is ordinary for a two year old who has never been taught how to read, without ever being taught the alphabet, to pick up an encyclopedia and read a page out of it simply because there were books laying around the house and his parents spoke in complete sentences to him? And how did he learn the letters and then what sound to apply to each letter and how did he learn the arrangement of the letters and the sound of the word? How did he know that the letters formed words?
I agree 100 percent that we are not giving kids credit and I don't believe in talking down to children of any age. They come in with everything the need and carry all the knowledge needed to make it through life. Usually by the age three the forget and go into a kind of sleep/slumber with their knowingness.
Love and Light, Marietta

bgruagach · 07-11-2008, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marietta

Dear bgriagach, Thanks for the imput.
So are you saying that it is ordinary for a two year old who has never been taught how to read, without ever being taught the alphabet, to pick up an encyclopedia and read a page out of it simply because there were books laying around the house and his parents spoke in complete sentences to him? And how did he learn the letters and then what sound to apply to each letter and how did he learn the arrangement of the letters and the sound of the word? How did he know that the letters formed words?
I agree 100 percent that we are not giving kids credit and I don't believe in talking down to children of any age. They come in with everything the need and carry all the knowledge needed to make it through life. Usually by the age three the forget and go into a kind of sleep/slumber with their knowingness.
Love and Light, Marietta

I've not encountered any parents who have encyclopedias in the house who don't also read to their children. Kids who are read to see the words at the same time they hear the words being spoken and tend to be quick to make the connection.

Here's a question that the "genetic knowledge" thing doesn't explain -- why would this supposedly inborn knowledge just happen to be consistent with the culture they are born and raised in? Why wouldn't a Chinese prodigy child who was adopted and raised in a non-Chinese household spontaneously speak or read Chinese?

If this genetic knowledge is inherent in the whole human race, why aren't English prodigies spontaneously speaking and reading Chinese, and why aren't Chinese prodigies spontaneously speaking and reading Greek, or English, or Latin?

Marietta · 07-11-2008, 03:42 AM

Dear
You wrote: What I'd like to know is what all these "special powers" are that are so special. If they're the type of thing you enumerated on page one of this thread (i.e., healing, past life memory, etc.) those are not that special.

My reply: I don’t know what special powers you are asking about?

You wrote: Everyone is capable of affecting healing.

My reply: I agree 100%

You wrote: Lots of people claim to have past life memories. I believe I have some. That doesn't make such a belief or experience scientific or valid in anyone else's eyes. Additionally, I find it amusing how many people remember being queens, kings, Mary Magdalene, etc. and how few people remember the kind of boring, everyday lives like I had. Ones like my current life where I work, sleep, eat, hang out, and die. This alone indicates to me that a lot of this past life stuff is wishful thinking. We can't all be Cleopatra, you know.

My reply: Again I agree with you. In my most recent past life I was homeless and my grand child in this life was my sibling. I’m exceptionally clean and tidy as a result in this life.

You wrote: Anyhoo... what are these special powers that only happen in so few people?
Because as far as I can tell, there are tons of people out there and nearly all of them have some capacities in healing, empathy, telepathy, and so forth. They seem like pretty normal human traits to me, but just like being good at math, having a gift of drawing, or being pitch-perfect in singing... some are better than others

My reply: Once again we are in agreement. Here is the first sentence from the third post I made in this thread about the Indigo’s.

“The Indigo Children are not to be considered “superior or elite” in comparison to other humans, but rather viewed as living demonstrations of the dormant abilities that are NOW beginning to rapidly unfold among ALL HUMAN POPULATIONS.”

I think you are going by claims made by other people not Azurite Press.

You wrote: It all still seems to buy into the "ooo, I feel so special and unique! I am so important!" worldview that is so prevalent in the Western modern world. An attempt to make life interesting and boost self-esteem, make us feel better about any perceived inadequacies we have.

My reply: That’s not how anyone in our group views it or feel about it.

You wrote: As for cellular memory- what are you talking about? Do you just mean something resonates with you? That you feel like you remember something? Do you realize that just because we have a feeling, thought, or what seems like a memory does not mean it's accurate? We can fabricate memories. We can convince ourselves of all sorts of stuff that is completely not grounded in reality.

My reply: What I am talking about is knowing things that you have never studied or heard of and then finding out that it is accurate. Also past life memories of places that you have never been to and can describe accurately.

You wrote: And as for being unwilling to debate
My reply: the only thing I said I was not going to debate was Judaism, Kabbalah and my form of translating the Hebrew Torah for my own personal study, which has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with this thread.

You wrote: these posts have made it clear that you made huge claims in the OPs and then were unable or unwilling to back any of them with established reference material- your own or anyone else's.

My reply: I’ve answered every question asked of me that I am physically able to answer.

You wrote: Everyone is supposed to agree with you or completely ignore said claims on the basis of your own "cellular memory.

My reply: Please go back and read all of my posts. I have never asked anyone to agree with me and I am not trying to talk anyone into believing what I believe. This is my personal path which is not for everyone and I respect that. I’ve said that I will debate with anyone who has a working knowledge of the topic. How do you debate with someone who only wants to make promote an argument and fun of the material without knowledge of the material.

You wrote:" You don't want debate. That's understandable, because you seem ill equipped to provide any real evidence of your claims.

My reply: First I would suggest going back and reading the articles I posted. What kind of evidence do you want? Are you asking me if I can “PROVE’ to you that the indig’s are real? If this is what you are seeking, I can’t provide what you want. Nobody can make you believe anything that you don’t want to believe. If you’re not open to something it can’t be proven to you. I can’t make you believe something you have determined you will not believe no matter what material I quote. Unless it comes from your little corner of learning, it is not valid to you so what is the point. I have provided the material I have, Good Morning American did a segment on the Indigo Children and so did ABC new do a segment on them but unless it comes from one of your cronies, you simply will not acknowledge the validity of the source.
What I can tell you is that I can see the indigo blue auric field around these people which is where the term Indigo children came from, but can I tell you who has what DNA activated providing doctors reports, no I cannot. Does this mean that testing has not been don’t, NO it doesn’t. It simply means that I am no privy to these reports other than second hand. Most adult Indigo’s would never allow someone to take samples of their DNA, therefore the only DNA samples that have been taken are from very young children against their will.
If you have specific questions about the Indigo children I will do my best to provide an answer but if you are wanting me to convince you, I don’t have the power or desire to do this.

Love and Light, Marietta

Marietta · 07-11-2008, 04:33 AM

You wrote: I've not encountered any parents who have encyclopedias in the house who don't also read to their children. Kids who are read to see the words at the same time they hear the words being spoken and tend to be quick to make the connection.

My reply: My brother in law was in Iraq working when he met his wife and they had a child while living there, it is this child who could read at age two. I don't believe they had many books around. I believe he was programming computer mainframes at the time the encyclopedia was on computers that he used for work. Even if they read children's books to him, this would not explain how he could read and comprehend the complex ideas in the book he read or how when he was sat in front of the computer he was able to type in the complicated commands needed to use a computer back then. This young man is in the top 1% IQ range. Reading to children does not produce genius. If this was the case all the kids I know should be reading by at least age five on their own and would not need to attend grade school.

You wrote:
Here's a question that the "genetic knowledge" thing doesn't explain -- why would this supposedly inborn knowledge just happen to be consistent with the culture they are born and raised in? Why wouldn't a Chinese prodigy child who was adopted and raised in a non-Chinese household spontaneously speak or read Chinese?
If this genetic knowledge is inherent in the whole human race, why aren't English prodigies spontaneously speaking and reading Chinese, and why aren't Chinese prodigies spontaneously speaking and reading Greek, or English, or Latin?

My reply: View the video link I provided in my post to bananabrain. It is of a young girl who speaks 11 different languages.

From what I have read, we forget (consciously) once we start to speak. Regardless of nationality children learn the language spoken in order to be able to communicate. If a Spanish child is adopted by an American and starts to speak Spanish the American family would not recognize the foreign language and just assume that the child was baby talking and would correct it.
A very close friend whom I grew up with has an adopted sister from Korea. She was brought her at age three (now age 56) and to this day she speaks with such a strong accent that it is hard to understand her.
My granddaughter who is not Japanese and was never taught Japanese but lived next door to a Japanese family from age two to age three half and she could understand the children when they had a part with all Japanese children speaking Japanese at the age of three. She didn't speak it but could understand what they were saying. The Japanese child that lived next door could speak English but when she had a birthday party and there was a group of Japanese girls together they all spoke Japanese and my grand daughter would answer them in English. She could understand them. My granddaughter also used sign language to communicate from birth without being taught. I have a picture of her signing at age four months.
We have so much potential that we don't tap into, it is amazing.
Love and Light, Marietta

bananabrain · 07-11-2008, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marietta

I have told you how I was translating the hebrew without all the rules

and i have told you how that doesn't make any sense.

Quote:

and told you that I found Physics in the text and that when I started studying Physics I already knew it. What more do you want?

as i have said about eight times, an EXAMPLE of this "physics" you claim to have found in the text. am i not saying this right?

Quote:

I'm here to discuss Indigo's and Keylontic Science, two topics you know nothing about.

did *i* bring up kabbalah and the Torah? no, *you* did. now those are subjects i *do* know something about and if you are trying to use them for support, as you are indeed trying to do, then i am afraid i have to point out how they don't actually support you.

Quote:

How do you explain these kids and what they know? Where does the knowledge come from if not from cellular memory, it wasn't taught: She sees the images in her head and then paints them. The second is of a little blind girl who can play classical music after hearing only once.

i don't know how my son picks up the things he picks up - i certainly didn't teach him how to work the satellite TV or DVD player and he can do jigsaws that he shouldn't really be able to at this stage. nobody really knows. but in terms of exceptional abilities like the ones you're pointing out, you're basically falling into a major logical fallacy: because theory X provides an explanation for behaviour Y, it does not follow that theory X is necessarily the most appropriate explanation for this behaviour. it could be theory Z or indeed theory A - but to insist that the answer is "correct" without having examined appropriate alternatives is simply picking the first thing that suits you. have you come across occam's razor? you're not applying it. more to the point, you're not even going for something likely - you're going for a completely far-out explanation of something that doesn't seem to convince anyone else.

Quote:

What is the purpose of the 36 lahmed vav niks? Why are there always 36 here, not 37, not 35? If they are merely righteous people why on 36? Define how you are using the term righteous?

there's a very good article on wikipedia that answers all these questions quite concisely, but basically it's 36 based on a Talmudic tradition: Tzadikim Nistarim - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - as for "righteousness", books have been written on what we mean by that.

Quote:

I’ve answered every question asked of me that I am physically able to answer.

no, you haven't.

you haven't explained how this "worldwide inquisition" (for which you have provided no evidence) was able to remove letters from hebrew texts which predate the council of nicea, much less affect the hebrew spoken by jews in babylon between that time and the high middle ages.

you haven't given examples of this so-called physics you found.

you haven't indicated where in the mishnah (which you were the first one to reference) these so-called rules you're talking about are outlined - nor have you given any concrete examples of these rules, you have only talked in the vaguest possible terms about what they might be related to!

as for the other stuff, the fact that you are talking about "science" without understanding the basic importance of peer-reviewed research undermines anything you have to say about DNA - and i don't even know anything about that, but clearly path_of_one does.

b'shalom

bananabrain

Marietta · 07-11-2008, 04:42 PM

Dear bananabrain,
You wrote: In response to:I have told you how I was translating the hebrew without all the rules
---End Quote---
and i have told you how that doesn't make any sense.

My reply: If it doesn't make since to you, That's ok, It made perfect since to me. It wasn't intended for you, it was for my personal learning. At the time (while in my early training) it served me well!!!!

---Quote---
and told you that I found Physics in the text and that when I started studying Physics I already knew it. What more do you want?

My reply: Keylontic Science which filled in the blank spots.

---End Quote---
i don't know how my son picks up the things he picks up - i certainly didn't teach him how to work the satellite TV or DVD player and he can do jigsaws that he shouldn't really be able to at this stage. nobody really knows.

My reply: Not true, I do know. Your the one saying that there is no such thing as someone with abilities that can't be explained, such as the Indigo's. The term Indigo is merely used due to the blue hue in the auric field of the Indigo's.

---Quote---
What is the purpose of the 36 lahmed vav niks? Why are there always 36 here, not 37, not 35? If they are merely righteous people why on 36? Define how you are using the term righteous?
---End Quote---
there's a very good article on wikipedia that answers all these questions quite concisely, but basically it's 36 based on a Talmudic tradition: Tzadikim Nistarim - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Tzadikim Nistarim - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) - as for "righteousness", books have been written on what we mean by that.

My reply: Your side stepping my question. You said at the beginning of this post that you were posting in this thread to explain the teachings of Judaism. Therefore give me the answer without pointing me to an encyclopedia or don't you know the answer?

--Quote---as for the other stuff, the fact that you are talking about "science" without understanding the basic importance of peer-reviewed research undermines anything you have to say about DNA - and i don't even know anything about that,

My reply: Your opinion which doesn't negate a single thing.

If you want to debate Judaism, Kabbalah or the translation techniques of Hebrew take it to the appropriate area. This is not the place for this discussion.

Love and Light, Marietta

Still smiling!!!!

Marietta · 07-11-2008, 04:52 PM

I just went to the link about lahmed vav nik's. This is a pretty big claim from someone who is accusing the Indigo's of thinking they are special, which THEYDO NOT.

It says: Quote: As a mystical concept, the number 36 is even more intriguing. It is said that at ALL TIMES times there are 36 SPECIAL PEOPLE in the world, and that were it not for them, all of them, if even one of them was missing, THE WORLD WOULD COME TO AN END. The two Hebrew Letters for 36 are the lamed, which is 30, and the vav, which is six. Therefore, these 36 are referred to as the Lamed-Vav Tzadikim. This widely-held belief, this most unusual Jewish concept is based on a Talmudic statement to the effect that in every generation 36 righteous "greet the Shechinah," the Divine Presence (Tractate Sanhedrin 97b; Tractate Sukkah 45b).

Do you care to tell us what the Shechinah is?
And by all means please tell us how you define Rightousnes according to Judaism?
Would you have us believe that 36 people who are merely do gooders hold this world together with their good deeds? What are these good deeds? How does this work? What is the physics behind this? Where is it found?

Love and Light, Marietta

Marietta · 07-11-2008, 04:58 PM

It goes on to say that these 36 lahmed vav niks have the purpose of justifying the purpose of mankind in the eyese of God.
PRETTY BIG CLAIM