|
Post by maat on Aug 23, 2006 0:17:56 GMT
"Man is no eject. Man is a project. He is a creature still in transit between the beginning and the end of times, from fish to Man. What is Man? Man is an appointment not yet kept, a promise not yet fulfilled, a destination not yet reached. Man is a Zero straining across an abyss to become a One, a Nothing that would be a Something. Man is a fraction that would be a whole. Man is a fortress wall not yet breached, a tangled knot not yet solved, and a captive not yet free. Man is a fish waiting for a fisherman. Man remains a lungfish still, an unfulfilled hybrid of fish and not-yet-man, a creature that once breathed water, then air, but which may yet also learn to breathe fire. Here is the choice before you today, fish-man, and it is the law of your life: aspire or expire! www.darkage.ca/blog/_archives/2005/1/3/222548.htmlMaat
|
|
|
Post by maat on Aug 25, 2006 3:30:05 GMT
My word - are you all lost on this one?
|
|
|
Post by maat on Aug 29, 2006 2:29:05 GMT
"For you grow to heaven, you don't go to heaven. It is within thine own conscience that ye grow there," (reading 3409-1).
;D Just seemed like a good place to post this... are we builders or gardeners... apprentices (or juniors) at that.
Maat
|
|
Munro
Member
Lodge St. Andrew Livingston Station No.1587
Posts: 27
|
Post by Munro on Dec 17, 2006 15:03:38 GMT
"For you grow to heaven, you don't go to heaven. It is within thine own conscience that ye grow there An truly terrific quote Maat. Truly. I personally am not familiar with the terms "project" and "eject" in conjunction with one and other -as opposites. Perhaps you can help me understand their definition here? If I am to understand; man, as a project, is still under construction. He is something that must be worked upon -smoothed out and then built upon -endlessly towards a unity with heaven. As an eject, he is an opposite to this? A bi-product of the source from which we all came? I would certainly vote " project" if this were the case.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Dec 18, 2006 1:48:14 GMT
An 'eject' as in 'kicked out' of the Garden of Eden.
I sometimes think of Adam and Eve as the first division of the single cell into two cells, as in the the creation of a new body for a baby. The soul must then necessarily leave the heavenly state to animate the new form. So I guess we, the soul, is kicked out to a certain extent.
As a baby grows by time and experience into a perfect adult body - so I think the soul, by repeated trials and experience grows unto the stature of the Perfect Man - as they say.
Maat
|
|
|
Post by whistler on Dec 29, 2006 2:01:49 GMT
Sorry Maat, You have really lost me on this one.. The whole Adam and Eve thing doesn't ring my bell at all.. Even the single cell doesn't truely work either - I find it easier to ponder on the "Soul" that decided to inhabit that Cell - I am sure it selected the gender it needed for the lessons it wished to learn. I will watch this Poll with interest Happy New Year Maat
|
|
|
Post by Hubert (N. Z.) on Dec 31, 2006 22:56:36 GMT
Hi Maat, This is certainly a topic worthy of discussion, but one we will need to ponder on for a considerable time. As serendipity would have it, I am currently reading "The God Code" by Gregg Braden & reccommend your perusal of it. as it posits much on your question. In short we are still in a process of evolvement, BUT NOT from the fish! ~ In fact there is current suggestion that both bodies of the evolution theorists are correct in some manner, but the exact MIX of their ideas has yet to be determined. Cheers, Hubert
|
|
|
Post by Lightworker on Jan 3, 2007 3:35:51 GMT
Hi Ma'at - Happy New Year While Hubert was responding to your Eject or Project, I wanted to let you know that I have read "Stalking the Wild Pendulum" on your recommendation and found it very worthwhile. The end of the book was a bit disappointing though! But really enjoyed his ideas and the way of expression. I passed "The God Code" on to Hubert and really gained a lot in understanding from that. You may have already read it??? Regards, Lightworker
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jan 12, 2007 5:23:58 GMT
Since Man's constitution involves a number of different kingdoms, perhaps the nature and purpose of Man covers a number of kingdoms also
Cheers
Russell
|
|