Conference hydra::dejavu

    Lorenzo --
    
    I'm not sure whether we are or not.  If one prepares oneself
    spiritually, then one is ready; if not, then one isn't.  Even if
    we aren't living in the last of the last days, it doesn't hurt to
    prepare oneself spiritually anyway.  [In Christian terms, see Luke
    13:40 -- "Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh
    at an hour when ye think not."]  Then one should be ready.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    Pardon me, Lorenzo, but do you ever write notes that are more than
    one sentence long?  
    
    No one knows if we are living in "the last days."
    
    
    John M.

    
    	Well, I feel spiritually ready, but just maybe I can improve
    on my physical readiness;

        Are the cities safe ?   The Hopi's are predicting a famine.
    How many of you Dejavu'ers have any sort of food stockpile ?
    Many recent prophets are predicting massive earthquakes, or
    perhaps even a shift in the Earth's axis.   Given the psychic
    awareness of the participants here, I would guess that some of
    us have made or are now making some extensive preparations.
    
    	Do any of us plan to move to the "safe areas" as predicted
    by such as Edgar Cayce or the Hopi ?   (I am contemplating
    such a move for myself, in the near future.)   The harmonic
    convergence was said to mark the beginning of "The great
    purification", a difficult time (perhaps somewhat similar in
    concept to armageddon) that is supposed to last five years.
    
    	On the other side;  how many of you feel that such fears are
    used as an excuse for running away to hide from whatever?
    
	Alan.
    
	PS, Jesus made some interesting remarks about preparedness;
    in one quote he spoke about building one's house on rock.   In
    another passage, he spoke about the maidens who should keep
    oil ready in their lanterns...

    I guess it's all in how you look at it.  In your neighborhood, maybe
    it is the last of the last days.  I am too busy trying to make my
    little piece of the world a nicer place to be than to worry about
    the last days.  Therefore, if I can be all I can be, at any given
    time, the last days will take care of themselves.  
    
    I do not like the "scare tactics" approach on cleaning up one's
    act.  I am not sure just how much lasting a lesson one learns that
    way.  I feel that *if* I am to stay on this plane, I had better
    get to "fall cleaning", by that I mean my atmosphere externally
    as well as internally.  I do not tend to do things because I am
    afraid a giant cloud will come down for the last load tomorrow.
    I work much harder when I think that I'm going to be in this a bit
    longer.  
    
    Don't you think your type of approach would simply set lazy,
    unconcerned,unaware individuals more firmly in that mindset?
    (Why bother...., grab all the gusto, etc.) Or as another activity,
    send people into the *acting* of higher conciousness. (Well, if
    I go to church 10 times next week, and give 20% of my take home
    pay)...does that really teach anything on deeper levels?
    
    For me, personally, I just try to get by every day, living in the
    moment, and that is difficult enough.  I let tomorrow worry for
    itself.
    
    Dawna
    

    Halleluja!
    

    Re .2 (John M.):
    
    >Pardon me, Lorenzo, but do you ever write notes that are more than
   >one sentence long? 
    
    Yes, Lorenzo did.  He gave a very vivid and beautiful description
    of a spiritual experience he had in the note about beliefs.  In
    fact, Lorenzo's first note in this Conference was _two_ sentences
    long. :-)
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    	I assume we are speaking of the last days of the Earth.
    	If that's the case, let's go!!  Where to next??  A new
    	universe?  A new life form?  I've always sort of been
    	partial to Saturn.  *8-)
    
    					Carla
    

            Anyone watching the competing USA cable-TV networks:
     
    EWTN  - Eternal Word Television Network (Roman Catholic)
     CBN  - Christian Broadcasting Network (Pat Robertson's 700 Club)
    
            will get exactly the split in preparedness that we have here:
    
    EWTN  - live this life in a sanctified manner & trust in God.
     CBN  - prepare for Armaggedon by sending your plede to This Number. 
    
            I prefer the first, but the second seems to be gaining despite
            the PTL (Jim Bakker & Tammy Faye Bakker) Pray-TV scandal. Why?
    
            It's the predominant delivery-system of the host-culture.
            Currently, hysterical TV-selling saturates fixed-frequencies.
            Shall we forego TV altogether & listen to WJIB-FM radio
            while we quietly make dinner in the kitchen? Sounds good!
            Or to set of wind-chimes tuned to the aeolian harp intervals? 
    
    - Boleslaw                                                           
     

    
    I had a long(winded) discussion with my fundamentalist-thinking
    sister last weekend.  She has decided that nothing, but nothing
    is going to change the downward-spiraling course of the world, and
    that she is quite ready for the 'next coming' and looking forward
    to the cleansing (or whatever she thinks is going to happen).
    
    I'm not really into doom-and-gloom scenarios (of course, that is
    ALL in how one views things), and therefore if we can all manage
    to clean up our acts here on earth and start putting the 2 greatest
    commandments into practice BEFORE the second coming of Jesus then
    we might actually be able to turn things around here and that we
    would all get along IN LOVE instead of killing one another.          
    
    I once read somewhere that it might be possible to change the course
    of prophesized events if we really want to (as in Revelations).
    
    Kind of the difference between looking at a half-empty glass and
    a half-full glass.  My sister only sees the bad in the world - and
    I try to see only the good.  The problem here is that if we create
    our own realities, then she is cancelling out my positive thoughts
    so we need more positive thinkers before we can manage to turn things
    around even one iota.
    
    Cindy
    

    an aside...Isn't it interesting how much attention Lorenzo seems
    to generate?  It rather underscores, for me, the willingness we
    have to be "different" (manipulated, maybe) than we might otherwise
    be with someone who has a different approach.
      
        Lorenzo, I hope you have taken the time/energy necessary to
    have cleaned up your own act in order to save yourself for whatever
    it is you think is happening to you (now or in the imminent future.)
    The negative approach to life envisioned by the doom-and-gloomers
    (who have been similarly using scare/control tactics in their so-called
    phrophesies for the last 2,000 years) is disdainful to me.  I prefer
    a much more positive life than the one so many are afraid of living.
        Why is it that people keep harkering back to these ancient
    forecasts when it is quite clear (given the 2,000 years so far of
    the failure to manifest in anhililation) that it is a *crock*?
    
        As .1 or .2 or .something reminded me...just exactly how do
    you think Jesus will be re-appearing?  If *I* had evolved to the
    extent Jesus had, I might stop by for a visit, but I don't think
    I'd wanna stay (just look what happened to him the first time around.)
    :-)  Can you imagine the people trying to crawl all over him, etc.?
    (...and rock stars think they have it bad...)
        FYI, I have a friend who is a channel (no, not Jach [Lazaris])
    who channels an entity who claims to be Jesus.  I say this in all
    seriousness.  I have yet to listen to any messages from "him" so
    I have very little to say about it.  (Could *This* have been the
    prophesized second *coming*?)
      
    Frederick-with-tongue-in-
    

RE: .3 (Alan)

This reminds me of something Mikie Morgan said (I think); that when the
Harmonic Convergence didn't "happen," people would re-interpret the prophecies
to make them apply for later.

As I recall, all of the Hopi hoopla etc. was to happen AT the Convergence.
Since it didn't, the "prophecies" have to be re-interpreted.


RE: .10 (Frederick)

For once, I have to agree with you.  People have been saying they were in the
"last days" for the last 2000 years.  In fact, the New Testament strongly
indicates that it should have happened within the lifetime of some of the
apostles.


John M. 

    Yessirree,
    
    This topic is in the process of being 'file 13ed' in
    DSSDEV::Philosophy. 
    
    My opinion is that we all instinctively know that something, someday
    will change the way we live, for better or for worse. And we develop
    stories, or future myths, or prophecies about that time. 
    
    The human race, and more probably the planet, will be around until the
    sun consumes us; or the sun goes out; or we survive long enough to find
    a new home. 
    
    At that time the old planet Earth will be called the Mother and humans
    will be thought to have been developed in the Garden on the Mother.
    Alas, so much for future mythology... B^) 
                                                 
    In case your wondering what I'm saying... There is no end times... 

    The Harmonic Convergence was to mark the beginning John... it's
    easy to check (if you have about two days_:-)_just go back and check
    the old HC notes.  The old age is beginning to pass.. that means
    change and perhaps trauma.  This is a time when we "leap empty handed
    into the void".  I'm doing some small things to prepare... getting
    as far out of debt as I can, planting a garden next summer.. but
    basically I don't think one can plan for these times.
    
    I trust in the Myoho to take care of me and mine while the transition
    is happening, one must remain true to oneself, one must prepare
    oneself for whatever transformation is occuring.

    
    	RE .11 (John:)
    
    	As I read it, the convergence was just the first day of a five
    year period.   I'll wait a few years before I accept or dismiss
    those prophecies.
    
    	Agreed, people under great stress often develop myths about
    the end of the world, as any person well read in history and
    anthropology would know.    Whatever incredible events *do* happen
    in the upcoming decade, I think a lot of the prophets are going
    to go away disappointed.    (I have a theory that God has somehow
    planned a future that will fufill all these prophecies, but will
    still contain elements that will catch everyone by surprize.)
    
    	I think we have real evidence pointing to great changes and
    challenges to be faced in this generation:
    	1) AIDS must be understood.
        2) The ozone depletion may cause us some real weather problems.
	3) pollution of the oceans is reaching the critical stage where
    		in upcoming years we will decide whether the oceans
		live or die.
    	4) the world economy has become interdependent to an unprecedented
    		degree.  Problems like the US defecit become everyone's
    		problem.
    	5) Nuclear waste, dangerous chemical waste;  humanity needs
    		to learn how to deal with the technological forces
    		we have unleashed, but we have difficulty understanding
    		the dangers of poisons we can't see, taste or smell.
    	6) Some species face extinction, while others such as some insects
    		resist control, and may get out of hand.   In general
    		the ecology of the planet is losing stability from the
    		world wide assault of technology, and the loss of diversity
    		of species.
    
    	That listed only some of the *obvious* serious problems.   On
    top of that, I think humanity has come to the crossroads where
    the reality of spirits of good and evil is an issue that *must*
    be understood for us to find a stable means of survival.   Again
    this is a case where we will have to become more adept at dealing
    with elements of the universe that our physical senses do not
    give us direct access to.   I hope that in the upcoming years,
    humanity learns enough to validate the truth in religions, and
    to reveal the false myths.

	In short, while I do not simply swallow all these prophecies
    whole, I am forced to recognize that the forces of history are
    gathering, and great changes *are* in the making.
    
    	As it says in the _I_Ching_;  "The wise man takes the necessary
    precautions."   I admit I have doubts about my own precautions,
    as well as some of the plans being made by others.   It remains
    to be seen which of us will prove ourselves "wise" in facing these
    challenges.   I see little difference between preparing for "the
    last days", or simply preparing for hard times.   I think any
    such preparations can be justified, at this time in history, from
    either a materialistic or a religious perspective.   With all the
    events that are building, I think anyone would agree that some sort
    of incredible historical events *will* be happening rather soon.

    	Alan.

    PS: I believe the world, and humanity will survive this crisis.
        Lets not fool ourselves, however;   it *is* a time of crisis !

    Isn't the Harmonic Convergence suppose to start with a time of
    purification first (5 years)?  In a sense, that would change things  
    as we know them.  It might then be considered as "the end of the
    world" as it applies to our particular space.  
    
    A couple of areas I have really seen a difference in for the past
    several months:
    
    o  People are really "dropping" their masks.  By that, I mean that
       a person may have gotten along for a long time looking like they
       are one way, when in fact they are another way.  Well, now it
       seems that their "true identity" is showing through.  I am not
       sure if it is any activity on their part, or a more accute ability
       on others to see through the disguise.
    
    o  The old addage, "What goes around, comes around." I believe that
       a new type of balance has come about and that is *instant karma*.
       Again, it seems that balance is being found much more quickly,
       either negatively or positively.
    
    Has anyone else noticed any of this going on? (Or am I crazy....)
    
    Dawna

    
    
      A good note to read, to get a better understanding, is in the
    Christain note: 278.4 and .6; also if it's not asking too much,
    read Matthew 24:3-51 then YOU be the judge.
    
    
     I was thinking about when the U.S. bombed Libya. Those people didn't
    expect anything to happen that night, they could have been planning
    a picnic in the park, that next day. But when they went to sleep
    that night, they woke-up to destruction all around them. I know
    that there's a lot of you, who take that question I asked, too be
    very comical: But if you just look around at whats happening in
    the world today, you would see that the bible prophies have been
    and are being fulfilled: You have children rising up against their
    parents, wars and rumors of wars, we have famines, and pestilences,
    earthquakes, in divers places, you see thst many be offended, and
    betray and hate one another, you see that the gospel is being preached
    through out the world (like never before), you see many false prophets
    are gone out into the land and has deceived many ETC. I know that
    there's people that say: THIS HAS ALWAYS HAPPENED,(TRUE) but if
    you noticed, things has gotton worse, parents don't really have
    any rights to Parent their children any more, without them (parents)
    being taken to court by their children; last I would like to mention
    that if you noticed, that, the DAYS are being SHORTENED, there's
    so much violence, drugs, deseases, Gays marching for rights, haters
    of God ETC. But Jesus says: " WATCH THEREFORE: FOR YE KNOW NOT WHAT
    HOUR YOUR LORD DOTH COME" "EVERY KNEE "MUST" BOW AND "EVERY" TOUNGE
    MUST CONFESS"!!
    
    MAY GOD ADD A BLESSING TO THE READING AND UNDERSTANDING OF HIS WORD!!!
    
    (see, I can write more than one line B>)
    
    LORENZO
    

    Re .10 (Frederick):
    
    >    Why is it that people keep harkering back to these ancient
    >forecasts when it is quite clear (given the 2,000 years so far of
    >the failure to manifest in anhililation) that it is a *crock*?
     
    Because the message to Christians is that Jesus will return. But
    "when" is in serious doubt, according to Scriptures.  See Luke
    13:40 -- "Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh
    at an hour when ye think not."  These are the words of Jesus Himself.
    The basic idea is that Christians are _always_ supposed to be ready
    for that coming; the "doom and gloomers" are just reminding their
    brethren of the fact.
    
    >    As .1 or .2 or .something reminded me...just exactly how do
    >you think Jesus will be re-appearing?  If *I* had evolved to the
    >extent Jesus had, I might stop by for a visit, but I don't think
    >I'd wanna stay (just look what happened to him the first time around.)
    >:-)
    
    Yes, but to a Christian, Jesus came to minister_to/save us, not
    because He was looking for a pleasant visit.
    
    >    FYI, I have a friend who is a channel (no, not Jach [Lazaris])
    >who channels an entity who claims to be Jesus.  I say this in all
    >seriousness.  I have yet to listen to any messages from "him" so
    >I have very little to say about it.  (Could *This* have been the
    >prophesized second *coming*?)
     
    No.  Covered in Matthew 24:23-24, where Jesus said -- "Then if any
    man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it
    not. [23]  Forthere shall arise false Christs, and false prophets,
    and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were
    possible, they shall deceive the very elect."  A Christian will
    have a very personal religious experience, not a channeled one.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    I'm with you, Steve.  We are supposed to be ready at all times.
    I don't think, however that getting out of debt is the way to do
    it (I don't think that only those who are "in the black" will be
    saved).  I don't think stockpileing food or starting a garden will
    do it (I don't think that you can buy your way in to God's good
    graces with yummy stuff).  I don't think that building a cabin in
    the back woods with it's own water shead will do it.  What ever
    is to come will visit all of mankind showing no favor to the highest
    or the lowest of us.  We will all be judged on how well we have
    respected (read:loved) ourselves, others, and our "world" 
    (read:universe) as a whole.  That's not the sort of thing you do
    at the last minute in order to fulfill some perceived creteria.
    It is a way of leading you life.  If you continually make a very
    honest effort to do so throughout your life, you can't go wrong
    in this life, or the next. 
                          
    
    Marion

    	I do not think that DEJAVU is the place to be preaching religion.
    Quite honestly, I do not care to have religion rammed down my throat
    the way the base Note (and others of its type) have.  There are
    Conferences more suited for such discussions.  As Steve Kallis said,
    this Conference is for discussing and analyzing psychic phenomenon;
    granted, religion is based on such, but "WHAT WILL YOU DO IN THE
    LAST DAYS" is pure preaching, plus conflicting (and possibly insulting)
    others' religious views.
    
    	I do not force my religious views on others (I will state them,
    but I will never try and *force* others to believe), so please do
    not do it here.
    
    	Larry
    

    re: .19
    
    Point well taken, larry.
    
    re:  this note
    
    Perhaps this will bring us back to an apropriate point.  If it is
    true that the HC was the first day of a five year period that will
    bring great changes (and perhaps distruction) to our world, do you
    think that is true for only our world/dimension, or is it universal
    in all planes of existence?  Further, do you feel that we have played
    any part in bringing it on ourselves such as scoffing and disbelieving
    in the powers of the universe [not mentioning any names here ;^)] 
    
    Marion
    

    The whole idea of the end of the world being around the corner,
    and God (by whatever name) is going to return, take "his" people,
    and destroy the world is a very dangerous idea for all of us, and
    for Mother Earth.
    
    If we continue treating this world as a disposable, it won't be
    very long until it is unable to support life.  BY WHAT RIGHT CAN
    WE DESTROY OUR WORLD?
    
    This kind of "last days" philosophy leads people, including political
    leaders, to be careless in how we treat our environment.  If we
    don't clean up our act pretty soon, the world (at least life on
    it) will end, God or no God.
    
    RE .19 (Larry)
    
    I agree.  These sorts of discussions are better suited to any of
    several other files.
    
    Elizabeth

    
    
    ARGUE,
    FOR YOU LIMITATIONS,
    AND SURE ENOUGH,
             THEY'RE
             YOURS.
    
    IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THIS STATEMENT IS SELF ORDAINING FOR THE INDIVIDUAL
    WHO MAKES IT?
    
    MURRAY
    

Lorenzo,  As fond as I have become of you since getting to know you better
through DEJAVU, I am compelled to respond to a few small points.
Gay men and women are human beings and are entitled to the same rights 
and privileges as everyone else.  Today's children have been brought
in in a very uncaring, insensitive, materialistic world and its' about
time they took a stand on their own behalf, people who reject the tenents
of the bible (some of which I cannot accept myself) are not necessarily
haters of God but often are haters of intolerance and dogmatism.
    
Steve, A channeled experience can also be a "very personal religious 
experience" for some.  The experience is not diminished by not being 
within the scope of organized religions.


Marion,
I am not planting a garden to "buy my way into God's good graces".  I am
planting a garden to get through some difficult *physical* times that I
believe are upon us.  Nor do I feel the need to "be saved".

I do not believe that the bible is the word of God, nor do I believe that
belief in Christ as savior will erase all of the evil that a person has 
done and is continuing to do throughout his or her life.  I believe that
if I am to be judged at all.. I will have to judge myself.

Its far more comforting to believe the calvery will appear with heavenly
hosts to wisk one away to safely albeit.  I however, must stand on my own 
integrity, my own choices, my own character, my own actions.  
If I survive what is to come, it is because I was destined to survive, if 
I do not,.. I do not.

Whatever happens,.. I agree that change crucial to the survival
of the human species is on the way, and I welcome it with open arms.

Mary

 Lets not let fear be our guide for it certainly won't lead us were we want
to go.I am afraid that the merchants of fear bore me,I won't give that
festering blob(fear of the unknown) any of my energy.

    Re .23 (Mary):
    
>Steve, A channeled experience can also be a "very personal religious 
>experience" for some.  The experience is not diminished by not being 
>within the scope of organized religions. 
    
    To amplify on my observations, I believe that a religious experience
    is highly subjective; thus, that I might have one might not mean
    very much to you.  Hearing "Jesus" or anyone else as a channeled
    entity, I'd call a second-hand experience; this may be okay for
    some, but is it _personal_?  Maybe this is more semantics than
    substance.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr
    

    Steve, What was the bible if not channelled material?  Assumming
    that not all Christians have heard the voice of Jesus in their ears,
    they are "personalizing" the words they read in the bible that were
    spoken to and written by someone other than themselves, just
    as some others "personalize" words/perceived_wisdom channeled through
    whomever.  The trances of the yogi, the smoke_lodge of the American
    Indian, the chant of the Buddist, are all personalized religious
    experiences often leading to revelations of perceived truth.

    RE .25
    
    And what about the Prophets?  If The Christian-Judeic God can
    talk through a burning bush, Why not channel through people?

    The Christian-Judeic God spoke _to_ people, not through them, according
    to JudeoChristian scriptures.  In the context, it makes sense: bushes
    aren't people; they are "neuutral," for want of a better word. 
    A burning bush (or even a nonburning one) wouldn't have an opinion
    of its own, and thus couldn't be accused of adding its own bias
    to any words that were forthcoming.  Still in scriptures, when God
    gave Moses the Ten Commandments, they were carved on tablets, nott
    channeled through Moses.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    
    
    Re: last couple
    
    As was suggested during the sermon last Sunday with tongue-in-cheek
    humor, if we came across a burning bush, rather than observing it
    and listening, we would probably call the fire department!
    
    Carole
     

    re .28
    Bushes may not have opinions Steve,  but the men who wrote the bible did..
    .. as do the men who are interpreting the bible today.
    
    We are not given the original tablets to read... we are given books
    that have endured thousands of years of political manipulations.  

    How do we know what in fact happened to those ancient peoples?  
    How do we know some of those reports didn't come from a person 
    who was schizophrenic or halucinating?  Who spoke at Fatima and
    who heard?  Who speaks now at Medjugorje and who hears?

    The Christians are a great and noble people for the most part, as
    are the Jews.  That does not diminish the Truths the form the bedrock
    of other belief systems, nor does it reflect on those who pursue
    their own course free of the JudeoChristian scriptures.  
    The pure of heart search for Truth along different paths sometimes.  
    What kind of God would reject those who seek to bring light into the
    world because they wear the "wrong" label?
    

    Re .30 (Mary):
    
    >How do we know what in fact happened to those ancient peoples?  
    >How do we know some of those reports didn't come from a person 
    >who was schizophrenic or halucinating?  
    
    We don't; that's the difference between faiths.  In another conference,
    I go into what some might consider excessive detail differentiating
    between spiritual and historical truths (as subsets of ultimate
    truth); in you're interested, it's in REX::RELIGION.
    
    >Bushes may not have opinions Steve,  but the men who wrote the bible did..
    
    True; however, it's interesting that the _symbolism_ is from something
    neutral.
    
    >The Christians are a great and noble people for the most part, as
    >are the Jews.  That does not diminish the Truths the form the bedrock
    >of other belief systems, nor does it reflect on those who pursue
    >their own course free of the JudeoChristian scriptures.
    
    Well, a less semantically loaded phrase would be "outside the
    JudeoChristian scriptures," but I basically agree.  That this note
    has been primarily involved with JudeoChristianity is because it
    started in that context; as such, it's borderline DEJAVU material,
    but that's okay.  We've gotten more heated discussions in otgher
    notes here, including one or so that I authored the base note of.
    
    Tolerance and love is, as it always has been, the key.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr. 
    

    re: Mary Pare:
       WONDERFUL responses!  I applaud you for all of them.  I agree
    completely with what you say.
       
    re: others
       I do not feel like replicating the religion conferences here.
    I, for one, will withdraw any interest in this notesfiles if it
    goes in that direction.  I agree that *some* discussion is relevant
    but mostly because it goes along with concepts of *SPIRITUALITY*
    which I feel are relevant to all of us (even for those who are *not*
    *"God"-believers*)  
       I am of the opinion that what most of us object to here is similar
    to what some observers objected to in the PHILOSOPHY conference
    (in which Lorenzo also participates.)  The *question* is, in essence,
    not a sincere search for response.  It is an admonition that we
    must capitulate to some "goof-ball" notion of world-destruction.
    I will rebel with great vigor at this approach.  I, for one, am
    done with repeating the disharmonious and distorted views of
    the negative influences of our collective, past-and-still-present
    consensus realities.  I feel very strongly that Christianity played
    a significant role in this current "set-up" we have.  I also feel
    that **most** (if not *All*) religions are equally culpable.  The
    time, for me at least, has come to quit pointing fingers and start
    accepting responsibility.  I am afraid that this is *not* the method
    incorporated in this particular topic.  So, to that end, I will
    take responsibility for doing what I can to dissuade not only the
    tone of this message but also the incredible negativity it encompasses.
    
       There is a positive, loving, accepting, non-judgmental, infinite
    universe available to us.  *All* we need to do to experience it
    is to focus on it...turn our backs to negativity (not hide from,
    simply focusing [using the same energy] in the opposite direction.)
    Those of you who believe in Jesus as some sort of saviour are
    of course, free to do so.  Please don't try to save me!
      
    Frederick
    
    

    
    	wow!   Well, I feel this topic is appropriate here.   Sure,
    Lorenzo's bias shows in his wording, but I understand why he
    asked this *here*.   This same topic in a religion conference,
    or in the soapbox conference would be an animal of an entirely 
    different color.   The people in this conference *do* have
    an interest in prophecy, although I would guess that most of
    us would listen to prophecies from a non-Biblical source,
    as well as those from Biblical sources.   I am currently
    writing a few articles I intend to soon enter as a topic here
    in Dejavu, regarding all the various prophecies that indicate
    severe earthquakes and perhaps a shift in the Earth's axis.
    Even if Lorenzo had not entered this topic, I would have tried 
    to spark such a discussion.   I am interested in what kind
    of preparations people are making for the future, and I find
    the responses in this topic quite enlightening.
    
    	What do you do with gloom and doom prophecies;  Freak out?
    Ignore them?   I suggest that the appropriate response is somewhere
    in the middle.   I mentioned the _I_Ching_ quote earlier;  "the
    wise man takes the necessary precautions."   Once the precautions
    are taken, he goes on to live his life, knowing that he did what
    he could.   The middle road;  don't spend all your time worrying
    and freaking out, but don't dismiss it all either.  Take the
    *reasonable* precautions for what you see in the future.
    
    	If you say "If I refuse to believe these prophecies, then I
    won't help to create this nasty prophecised reality," well, I agree
    with this to a small extent.   But a person can take a few precautions,
    material and spiritual, without buying into the whole belief
    scenario.   If you take no precautions at all, in my opinion you 
    are making your own future more difficult.

	Lorenzo seems to have a gift for starting spirited discussion
    with only a few phrases.   He may not agree with your religion,
    but hey, you don't all seem to agree with his!   Discussion still 
    remains possible, and this topic is on a vital and important subject.  
    If everyone here subscribed to the same viewpoint, I would delete
    this conference from my notebook.
    
    	Alan.

RE: .16 (Lorenzo)


Now I understand why you normally keep your replies so short; the longer
ones do you a disservice.  I found certain comments in your reply intolerant
at best.

If you think these are the "worst times" I don't know what you would have
done in the Middle Ages.

BTW: As an ex-devout Christian, I can argue the Bible with the best.  If
you wish to take this up in RELIGION, please let me know.


RE: .28 (Steve)


Ah, but Steve, God DID speak *directly through Moses* most of the time.
In fact, at one point he told Moses "Aaron shall be your voice, and
you shall be the God he speaks for."  Moses's word was God's word and there
was no argument.

(FWIW: I think Moses, not God, carved the tablets.  Would you have broken
on the ground something GOD gave you?)

RE: Elizabeth Younger's Earth speech

Right on!

And I'm really in accord with Frederick on this topic.
    
John M.

    
    	Lorenzo, you have entered the identical title and base note in three
    conferences that I am aware of (DEJAVU, PHILOSOPHY, and RELIGION) and
    is probably at least in one other one, which I think you alluded to
    somewhere (CHRISTIAN) 
    
    	I personally find this simple fact of widespread 'cross-posting'
    somewhere on the borderline of acceptable behavior in notes. It leads
    one to speculate about your motives in taking such action. Notes
    is a medium for exchange of information and discussion of issues.
    In a way, this is like an experiment, testing the collective
    personalities (geometries? geographies?) of the different conferences
    with a 'benchmark' topic. 
    
    	I feel that the strict text of the note, even taken with the
    vehement tone of the title, is not strictly denominational, or even
    necessarily religious. Your personal name string, on the other hand,
    leaves little doubt as to your affiliation, which does throw a very
    patronizing and evangelical tone over the ensuing discussion.
    
    	If you were not a regular participant in these conferences prior
    to this topic, I would find your actions overly provocative. Because
    you are a known participant, I find these notes simply provocative,
    literally, you are provoking (sp?) the other members to defend themselves
    from what many will feel is an attack on some deeply held beliefs.
    I don't think that you want to attack anyone, really...but I think
    you DO want to bring people to your way of thinking, and you are
    apparently not satisfied with simply 'preaching to the converted'
    (in CHRISTIAN). 
    
    	Personally, I respect your enthusiasm to help others, even to
    the point of using strong statements. However, I think that you
    at least misunderstand the manner in which your statements effect
    others in the conferences, and perhaps are more concerned about
    a personal goal that you are trying to accomplish. I am speaking
    as an individual here. I have not consulted with anyone else, nor
    am I acting as a moderator of any conference (though I am a
    co-moderator of two of the conferences these notes have appeared
    in). I would like to explain a reason that comes to mind
    why it is a bad idea for you and those who feel as deeply as you
    do to post notes, as topics or as replies, which are as deeply
    challenging to the fundamental assumptions of an evolved conference
    as your notes appear to be.
    
    	First, we have to remember that our connections with each other
    through Notes is a very tenuous thing. Company policies and politics
    aside for a moment, we know each other only through the cracks of
    spare moments here and there. There's nothing really magical about
    Notes, the software tool, but I find magic in the spirit of Notes,
    in the wonder of huge distributed communities that now have blossomed
    into a host of individual relationships. 
    
    	When we open a conference, whether late at night, or during a long
    compile, or read a batch extract in the evening over tea, we read
    specific people talking about specific things. Maybe there are only
    five new notes. Maybe only one, but the fabric of the community
    is woven into that single note. We don't just read that note, we
    have a feeling of the reverberations of that note in the other people
    who have also added their words to the same conference, who we feel
    reading the same note. In a way, we have gathered many of our
    fellow noters into our minds, over a period of months and years,
    through the process of iterative discussion, reflection, and
    revelation. We are not focused on it as a goal, but by directing
    our thoughts and attention, our emotional caring selves towards
    a common interest, we participate in and become a part of a caring
    community mind. 
    
    	Of course there is disagreement. The 'group mind' is at best
    a metaphor, and if I were to carry the metaphor farther, then the
    mind is hopelessly schizophrenic, in a benign, even amusing sense.
    Still, the thread which makes any conference the magnet for the people
    who consistently come back to it, take the time to make it an
    electronic textual home, is more than just a few words sketched in 1.*,
    it is mutual respect of each other, some level of emotional involvement
    in the common interest. 
    
    	The risk in open conferences, as in any open community, is that
    new people will come in, and change the implicit assuptions. There
    might be an impression that new people have not read many of the
    old notes. That those common ideas that were discussed and agreement
    reached on so long ago were now tossed out by newcomers without
    question, maybe even implicitly with the statement of a different
    premise. The danger is real that those who benefit most from special
    interest conferences, who most need to support of a minority community,
    will be the first to leave without a fight, with hardly a word.
    If new notes no longer contain a host of implicit assumtions, but
    rather are forced to defend repeatedly those fundamental shared
    ideas that had been assumed before, the conference becomes tiresome
    to those who want to get ON with the subtleties, the shades of
    understanding which are miles beyond the point of deciding whether
    the entire subject matter of a conference is 'moral' or 'evil'.
    
    	I am not saying that you shouldn't participate in conferences
    that you don't agree with all the opinions expressed. I am only
    suggesting that you need to be particularly careful about how you
    express yourself, in the context of the conference you are writing
    into. Each conference has a rich history, and it has to be respected.
    
    	Let's suppose that you were a sailor, and normally noted in
    the SAILING conference (I've never so much as seen a note from the
    SAILING conference, so this example is entirely fictional!). A
    legitimate topic in that conference might be "Problems with Motor
    Boats", talking about how all motor boats make big waves, are noisy,
    and smell bad, etc. Now suppose there was a MOTOR_BOAT conference
    (Maybe there is, again, this is fiction) and you, as a sailor enter
    a topic, "Problems with Motor Boats", and list all of the same things
    as before in the SAILING conference. The response by the other
    conference members is sure to be quite different than in the sailing
    conference. If, in the SAILING conference, you were to propose a
    solution to the problem, that all motor boat owners should just
    go out and become sailors instead, there might well be some agreement,
    along with perhaps some calls for a compromise. On the otherhand,
    if you copied the same note, with the same wording, into the MOTOR_BOAT
    conference, there is sure to be a lot of 'flaming' about the
    intolerance of the sailors. The motor boat enthusiasts might decide
    to 'invade' SAILING. Both sides might start to shout 'harrassment',
    and if EVEN A SINGLE PERSON FROM EITHER SIDE takes it on themself
    to continually go into the other conference and continue to raise
    the single issue of contention (which has many facets, but is really
    a single issue) then either or both conferences might well lose
    the interest of its community, and will surely become tiresome for
    newcomers who are looking for useful, productive discussions that
    go beyond namecalling and shallow misunderstandings. 
    
    	The moral of this parable is that TACTFULLNESS is crucial to
    understanding, and that knowing one's audience is the only way to
    enter into a useful discussion. Further, humility in one's self and
    one's beliefs is crucial. If one's intention is to change the minds
    of others, one must be ready to accept a change in your own opinions,
    based on the words of others. At the very least, one must hear and
    understand that others are never quite so naive as we suspect when
    we first hear what they have to say, nor are our ideas so insightful
    as we would suspect they must be.
    
    	In conclusion, it is not generally polite to 'bait' conferences. If
    you must, there's always (or at least for now) BETHE::SOAPBOX.
    Understand that in the three conferences (RELIGION, DEJAVU, and
    PHILOSOPHY) that I am most concerned here, your title is a statement
    that assumes a specific theology that is not generally shared in
    the conferences, and which is in fact denied and refuted, implicitly
    and explicitly, in many of the previous notes. I would suggest that
    rather than provoke reactions with harsh statements, you either
    accept more of the implicit and explicit assumptions of the given
    topics, or find conferences which work under assumptions which you
    are more comfortable dealing with.
    
    	I've spent something over two hours writing this reply, which
    has made it much too long and convoluted. I apologize, and hope
    you understand, Lorenzo and everyone else, my main intention. Notes
    can be invigorating, or tiresome. It is invigorating when we are
    helping each other along to a shared goal which we could not reach
    except through the help of our network brothers and sisters that
    inspire us to find within ourselves a new way of expressing something.
    It is tiresome when we find ourselves saying the same things to
    the same people in different conferences in the same ways that they
    didn't seem to understand before. Here's a tiresome note at the
    tail end of an all-nighter, which is dedicated to much productive
    invigoration ahead for all. 

    	Ed

    re .35
    	Profuse apologies, Lorenzo, this base note is NOT in RELIGION.
    Only PHILOSOPHY and here, that I've seen 1st hand. 
    
    	See what happens when you work too much? ;-)
    
    	Ed

    Re: .35,
    
    I think you hit the nail on the head, even though you may have been
    asleep at the time. ;-)
    
    Re: Posting, Saying that "We are in the last days!" reminds me a lot of
    the Harmonic Convergence stuff this summer, (Same idea, different
    religion). I confess to going a little overboard this summer, some who
    frequent "Tem Noon's Cabin" can attest to that.  Calm down Lorenzo, if
    these are the last days, then God will take care of everything.  If, by
    a twist of fate Christ's second coming has been postponed, you might be
    left holding the bag.  Just remember that you have to be able to look
    back and laugh a few months, or years from now *if* time proves you
    wrong. 
    
    Personally, if God returns with all his glory (Special effect courtesy
    Industrial Light and Magic) and sees how we've screwed up this planet,
    I'd feel like a teenager who just totaled the family car. . . 
    
    . . . And the accident isn't covered by insurance.
    
    Dave

    Re .34 (John):
    
>In fact, at one point he told Moses "Aaron shall be your voice, and
>you shall be the God he speaks for." 
    
    By that logic, Moses was channeling God, and Aaron was channeling
    Moses. :-)   Actually, I've always read that as God told Moses what
    He wanted, and Aaron acted as a spokesman because Moses had a speech
    impediment.  [How dramatic would it be to hear, "L=l-let my p-p-people
    g-go!"?]
    
>(FWIW: I think Moses, not God, carved the tablets.  Would you have broken
>on the ground something GOD gave you?) 
    
    (Yes, if you had Moses' temper.)
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
     

    It seems to me that this conference does not really have well defined
    borders and concerns itself about diversity of opinion.  I think
    that the base note is legitimate.  I would be upset if this area
    began to dominate, but then I would be upset if, say Wiccanism or
    UFOs or even parapsychology were to dominate the conference (for
    more than a day or two -- I wouldn't mind a separate conference
    ON parapsychology, of course, but I would miss DEJAVU if it became
    one).
    
    There is a question of LORENZO's motives.  If his purpose was to
    stir debate and observe our responses -- to learn, even if only
    to learn how to counter anti-apocalyptist arguments -- then I would
    say that this is one of the major purposes of this conference. 
    If his purpose is to scare the rest of us into conversion to his
    religious beliefs, then his actions (as well as being unlikely to
    be fruitful) quite explicitly violate the guidelines under which
    DEC allows this and other conferences to exist.  I don't see strong
    evidence either way so under a "presumption of innocence" principle
    I would give him the benefit of the doubt.
    
    As for cross posting.  If he wants diversity of opinion, this would
    be an excellent way of getting it.  I would even call it an interesting
    experiment.  I have no problem with it.
    
    A word to the wise, however, LORENZO.  I am reminded of a story
    about Ramon Lull (sp?), the great Spanish Christian Mystic (and,
    from before his conversion, romantic poet).  He set off one day
    in a ship to convert the "heathen" in Arabia.  He was apparently
    still within sight of the ship when he made himself so obnoxious
    to those he was preaching to that he was stoned unconscious.  He
    was carried by sailors back to the ship and was returned to Europe.
    If you want people to consider what you have to say, rather than
    just have them instantly reject it and argue against it, than tact
    (*not* hypocrisy) is necessary.
    
    					Topher

    re: -.16
    
    Sorry Lorenzo, I don't agree--things *are not* getting worse
    in my opinion....
    
    Remember Stalinism, Hitlerism, or how about Viet Nam?  My
    family alone has survived:  1) the Russian Revolution, 2)
    the takeover of their country (Lithuania), Siberia labor
    camps, German labor camps, and even MIA in VietNam.  All this
    from my father's time to mine...
    
    My father is now deceased but his last 20  years were *peaceful*;
    my mother takes joy in her garden, my husband returned from VietNam.
    
    I realize this is personalizing this issue but the point is life
    today, as compared to the past, is relatively peaceful...I walk
    across college campuses unafraid.  I go to sleep without worrying
    about the Bolshevik's coming through the door.
    
    Check your history books as well as the Bible...and compare times.
    
    These are *GOOD* times.
    
    Maria
    

    RE:34
    
       SOUNDS LIKE A CHALLENGE TOO ME!:-0
    
    Meet me in the mail message file, and we'll go from there!!
    
    
    LORENZO
    

    Well, after reading so much, I have to agree, this topic is a little
    out of place. Perhaps another name, or tangent to go off on would
    have been better. Such as:
    
    DO YOU BELIEVE IN A SUPREME BEING, OR UNIVERSAL FORCE!
    
    	Just to throw a little wood in the fire, some deep thoughts
    to toss around:
    
    IF GOD IS FORGIVING, THEN HOW COULD ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO CALLS HIMSELF
    GOD, PUNISH YOU FOR AN ETERNITY, FOR BEING WRONG?  PERHAPS THIS
    SUPPORTS THE THEORY THAT WE DO REINCARNATE.  HOW ELSE CAN WE
    SPIRITUALLY DEVELOP OUR SOULS WHEN SO MUCH OF LIFE IS "LIVE AND
    LEARN"
    
    THE SECOND COMING OF CRIST IS FROM WITHIN!  IT MAY COME TO ANY ONE
    OF US A DIFFERENT TIMES!  WHY ELSE WOULD IT HAVE BEEN SAID, "BELIEVE
    NOT ANY MAN WHO CALLS HIMSELF CHRIST".  SINCE HE MUST BE ACCEPTED
    THROUGHT OUR HEARTS OR SOULS.
    
    ARE WE LIVING IS THE LAST DAYS?  YES, WE ALL HAVE, EVERYONE OF US
    FROM THE DAY WE WERE BORN.  HOWEVER THEY ARE OUR OWN LAST DAYS,
    NOT EVERYONES!
    
    WHY DO SO MANY CRIMINALS, ETC. HAVE TO CONFESS THEIR SINS OR CRIMES
    WHEN ON THEIR DEATHBEDS?
    
    THINK ABOUT IT!!!
    

    groan...  (or was that,.. m o a n )

    Re .43:
    
    Seconded; amen!
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    	I have this theory that Lorenzo is really an extraterrestrial
    scout for an invasion fleet which is massing on the far side of
    the Moon, waiting to conquer the human race for our wimmen.
    
    	He is asking us what we will do in our last days to see how
    we will respond, and will have the invasion fleet react accordingly
    based on our reactions to his query.
    
    	So, fellow humans, for the sake of every living creature on
    this planet - DON'T ANSWER HIM!
    
    	I know this when I became suspicious that Lorenzo continued
    to write in cryptic, block-letter English, which all invading alien
    scouts do...
    
    	:^)
    

    My lips are sealed!    :^*

    RE: .46
    
    You type with your lips?!
    
    
    
    John M. :-)

    re: .47
    
    	You mean you don't?!?!?  Watch out, John, they might get
    	you first for their initial experiments.  Maybe I should
    	send you a crystal to intensify your spiritual powers...
    
    				    	Carla  *8-*  (looks strange,
    						      but it's one of
    						      my smileys with
    						      a pucker!)
    

    yes lorenzo we are ready 

    BTW, the further we go the closer we will find out how the topics
    that are supposed to be discussing in DEJAVU, are indeed tied to
    religion more deeply than you might guess.  It would be interesting
    to get a copy of whatever the Church used to compile the Bible,
    before the councils of Nicae and Chalcedon, among others, deleted
    and struck every reference Christ made to re-incarnation and exactly
    how he performed his miracles, out of the Bible.  They missed some,
    though (When Christ asked "Who do men say that I am" ..."some say
    you are John the Baptist, some say you are Elijah, some say
    Moses"...the people here may not be aware that Christ taught most of
    this stuff before, and that it has been stricken from the version of
    the Bible that we have inherited.  This is a topic for another note,
    which I will not introduce until I have completed my study of this.
    If anyone has an argument (who am I kidding, I'm going to watch
    my back when I drive home tonight), I ask you to wait until I post
    a note in which I will examine Christ's teachings which he made
    to an inner circle of his followers,and taught on a more abstract,
    easier to understand way to the masses.  If it means anything to
    anyone here, my guide has repeatedly given me the feeling, even
    as I type, that I should not discuss this here yet.  Therefore,
    I intend to keep out of whatever argument is to ensue, until I can
    back up my statements with enough concrete proof to convince the
    casual reader.  I realize this sounds far-out.  Before you reply,
    it might be interesting to read records of the councils of Nicae
    and Chalcedon...if nothing else I guarantee you a deeper understanding
    of how the modern Christianity we have inherited today in the organized
    churches, differs greatly from what was originally taught (one of
    the things decided at Nicae was that *war* was acceptable under 
    certain circumstances under Christ's teachings, (and of course the
    Crusades followed shortly afterward)...My advice is, I'm not trying
    to put down going to church, but if you want to get the best
    interpretation of what it is to be a Christian, sit down with a
    New Testament and read it to yourself, and draw your own conclusions
    and interpretations about what Christ said...rather than letting
    a preacher tell you what it is that Christ meant.
    
    So...the point is, just because the established Christian church
    has tried to cut out the paranormal from Christianity, and tried
    to rob us of the entire scope of Christian mysticism, doesn't mean
    they've succeeded, and I don't buy the argument that Christianity
    is not related to the things we normally discuss here.
    
    Now, relating to this topic, here are a few experiences of mine
    that I leave open to comment, and especially comment from anyone
    who has contact with channelers or guides.  
    
    If you wish to reply to the previous paragraphs, and feel even slightly
    angry at what I say, *please* do us all a favor and take a walk
    for 10 minutes (better yet read the funnies and laugh a few times)
    before you write your reply.
    
    On to this topic...
    
    I had a dream about two years ago that I still remember vividly.
    I was floating (physically floating, I was in my body) in a
    Martian-type landscape (orange sky, red and orange desert, jagged
    rock formations), and I was just floating, and I came upon a crude
    rock formation that looked like a bust of Reagan.  I heard his voice,
    as if over a PA system, saying "We are going to change the meanings
    of the words "war and peace" as they are today", and I heard thunderous
    applause and positive shouts...and *SUDDENLY* a wind came up that
    was more like a hand,or a solid concrete wall, than a wind.  This
    wind blew in every direction at once, and if you've ever seen a
    sock blowing in a strong wind, that is what my body was like in
    this wind...but I was quite safe, I was amazed at what was happening,
    and being blown about like a puppet, but I was staying in one
    place...in other words, like a sock tied to a pole in a hurricane,
    I was buffeted about but did not change physical location (that
    I noticed anyway)...I'll never forget the force of that wind in
    this dream.  Then as suddenly as it appeared, it stopped completely
    in one instant.  I looked around, and realized that I was ok, that
    I hadn't been hurt, and as soon as I realized that I woke up.  I
    was up for quite a while after that.
    
    Please, folks, I'm just relating the dream, if anyone has any political
    views they don't belong here and I'm not trying to start a political
    discussion.  You may reach me at USFHSL::WETHERINGTON if you wish
    to talk politics.
    
    OK...second dream.  About two months ago, I dreamed I was in a
    subdivision, a prosperous bedroom community suburb much like the
    one I spent my latter teenage years in.  People were playing, mowing
    their yards, maybe it was a Sunday afternoon.  I looked at the horizon,
    and notices seven cyclones moving in a parallel line, towards the
    sub. Everyone seemed to notice this at the same time, because panic
    in the streets ensued.  People were running around like chickens
    with their heads cut off, and I kept yelling "get in the basement,
    I have a basement, you can all come to my basement or get into your
    own fast!"  (How did I think I was going to fit all those people
    into my basement apartment). Anyways, no-one payed the slightest
    attention to me,and continued to run around paniced, shouting and
    acting totally confused. As the tornadoes got closer, I looked at
    them and they were *huge*...the one coming towards us must have
    been 400 or 500 feet wide.  Huge, black,and violent tornadoes, seven
    of them all in a line moving parallel to each other towards this
    subdivision.  The one immediately to our left, hit the edge of the
    sub and I stood and watched as cars,houses, and people were sucked
    up into it.  I heard the terrified screams of hundreds of people
    as they were sucked up into it.  Now, I have never heard bunches
    of people scream in my life, I do not have that sound in my field
    of experience.  But I heard it, and it scared the s*** out of me.
     That was all I needed as the one that was in line with where I
    was got closer and closer, and I grabbed my little brother (who
    happened to be by me when I deciced to get out of there) and some
    other little kid, who were both argueing with me "you can't make
    me come in if I don't want to! You can't make me go in the
    basement"...I practically had to drag them.  Well, all of a sudden
    we were back in my basement, which is in a town that has no
    neighborhoods like the one I described the tornadoes hitting, and
    I realized that we were all ok, that we had survived it. And I woke
    up.  I have had this dream described as sympolizing seven earthquakes
    that are to come (one of which may have been the one in L.A. recently,
    this was told to me by a woman who I believe is inspired in her
    interpretation of dreams.
    
    Last experience...last July I finished reading the book "Nature's
    End" (from whence came the BABYLON note) and I finished it in the
    car on the way to a ball game at Tiger Stadium here in Detroit.
    I was stunned by the book, almost numb with the things it described
    and the gloomy picture it painted for the future of the planet.
    I said a very fervent prayer, very strong and "psychicly" vital,
    if that makes any sense, to God, asking him *specifically* for a sign
    as to whether or not this was going to pass, whether or not humanity
    had a hope to survive.  Seated in the stadium about 1/2 hour later,
    chowing on a Ball Park frank and still pre-occupied with the book,
    a rainbow started to form over the stadium.  *Over* the stadium,
    straddling it squarely.  It became a complete rainbow, with the
    ends of the arch disappearing from sight over the walls of the stadium.
     It was the most vivid, deeply hued one I'd ever seen.  Then, a
    *second* rainbow formed over that, and completed itself, the ends
    of the arch disappearing form sight over the side of the stadium.
    So here was this huge, bright, vivid double rainbow straddling squarely
    over the middle of Tiger Stadium.  Many people were murmering about
    how beautiful it was, and I overheard several half-jokingly say
    it portended a Series victory for the Tigers.  As I sat there admiring
    it, I was told by my guide "That is for you."   It's very unusual
    for my guide to speak in words,usually I just get strong, almost
    intuitive feelings that feel like they're not coming from me.
    
    So now that I've typed probably way too much and tried your patience
    with my long-windedness...any comments?
    
    Doug Wetherington
    USFHSL::WETHERINGTON

    re: .51
        I admire the effort you have taken to relate some experiences
    you have had along with the intention of not proking hostility...
    I do not wish to spend much time with this but I did have a few
    thoughts as I read along.
        Your first dream sounds very similar to the descriptions Lazaris
    has given us in regards to the Causal plane (the plane, according
    to him, just beyond the Astral--where "causes and effects *hang
    out*") which he says is composed of angular lines (as opposed to
    circular, etc.) and pastels which don't often fit conventionally
    to what we observe on this plane (i.e., orange skies, blue clouds,
    red trees, etc., e.g.)  Also, he takes us there meditationally whether
    in person or on tape and when he does, we "fly" into the plane
    similar to the manner in which a bird might (arms out, feet together)
    and he always suggests to us that the horizon on the Causal plane
    is limitless (i.e., there is no horizon.)  So, that is one observation
    I had about your description.
        Personally, I enjoyed reading your Biblical references.
        As you seem to already be aware, 7 is a powerful number,
    metaphysically speaking.  As for your frustrations getting people
    to do as you wanted in your dream, I could probably spend a great
    deal of time going over possibilities here.  Some of them could
    be interesting, some of them could be hurtful...all of them would
    be speculative, at best.  There are negative ego repercussions
    within *my* interpretation, fears and angers also present.  And,
    ultimately, I don't think it would have much value, even if accurate.
    So, I will not go further with this.
      
    Frederick
    

    That was a *great* note Doug.  I'm looking forward to reading the
    results of your research into the mystical nature of Christ. 
    Those dreams were pretty interesting too.  I disagree with Frederick
    on this one.  I think you were having some kind of psychic signals
    in those dreams.  The seven tornadoes could signify seven natural
    disasters.  I've been getting some intuition hunches about the 
    February 88 timeframe..  Lets see what happens.  If you get any
    more dreams like those, we'd like to hear about them.
    Mary

    RE:51
    
     VERY INSPIRING; That reminds me f some of the dreams that I had:-)
    
    LORENZO
    

RE: .51
    
    Thanks its great when someone has the courage to post something
    personal.
    
    (As a non-Christian I don't feel at all threatened by the suggestion
    that there were suppresed teachings of Christ.  I would be very
    interested in any concrete evidence that you can present -- either
    that they existed or what they are.  Good luck).
    
    As for double rainbows.  I love double rainbows.  They are not as
    uncommon as people think.  Whenever I see a rainbow I always look
    for its double.  About half the time its there but very faint --
    you have to know where to look.  Here's a bit of optical trivia:
    if you see a double rainbow look at the sky between the two.  You'll
    find that it is noticeably darker than the rest of the sky.
    
    Sorry, I know that the optics of double rainbows are completely
    off the track of what you were saying, but they are one of my favorite
    things.  I didn't mean to distract from the emotional/spiritual
    point you were making.
    
    					Topher
    

    Topher,  why is the sky darker between the two?  I've recently seen
    a double rainbow too and I also find the optics facinating.

RE: .56
    
    The optics are really quite complex (translation: I followed the
    description, with difficulty, when I read it, but I couldn't for
    the life of me reproduce it without the material in front of me).
    
    Roughly speaking (very roughly) the rainbow is brighter than the
    sky.  The extra light to make this happen comes from *somewhere*,
    and that somewhere is the area outside the primary bow and inside
    the secondary (which is always there, in a sense, even if it is
    too faint to see, as is the third, fourth, fifth ... oo).
    
    					Topher

    Thank all of you very much for your responses.
    
    I was expecting to come in here and find all sorts of unpleasantness
    and disbelief of what I said.  How encouraging and elating to find
    the opposite.
    
    If anyone is interested in finding out more about the lesser known
    teachings of Christ I would encourage them most strongly to read:
    
    The Secret Doctrines of Jesus
    The Mystical Life of Jesus...both written by Ralph M. Lewis, former
    Imperator of the Rosicrucian Order after several trips on his part
    to the Holy Land
    
    also
    
    Edgar Cayce on Jesus 
    The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ
    
    Those last two I don't know who the author is.  The Edgar Cayce
    book should be available through most metaphysical bookstores, and
    the other three I believe are available through the Rosicrucian
    press in San Jose.  I will provide an address, and a listing of
    chapters/verses in the Bible that relate to some of this, in a note
    Friday after I serve my jury duty tomorrow.
    
    I am currently in the process of using the exhaustive resources
    of the University of Michigan Library in Ann Arbor, to verify/check
    on the claims presented in the first two books I mentioned above,
    most specifically, the records of the Church around the time period
    that the New Testament was compiled, and subsequent Councils that
    shaped the Christian theology we have inherited today.  
    
    I hope to post a note with my results sometime this winter...I work
    full time and go to night classes at EMU so it can be hard to find
    time to read this stuff.
    
    I ask the indulgence of the people here...I'm not trying to turn
    this into a Christian conference, but from what I've seen from CHRISTIAN
    so far, I think the responses to 566.51 would have been quite a
    bit more negative than what I got here, and frankly I don't need
    the aggravation.  RELIGION I have been told has many people from
    CHRISTIAN in it, so I'm rather leery of that.
    
    If things had worked out the way they could have, there wouldn't
    be seperate conferences for DEJAVU and CHRISTIAN.
    
    In the future I also intend to touch on the Christ spirit within man,
    Christos, the Son of God, and the lower self (or Doppeldanger as I believe 
    Goethe called it).
    
    DW
    
    PS. Another enlightening book on this subject is "Brother of the
    Third Degree" by Will Garver, written back in the late 1800s.  I
    am almost sure you can find this in any metaphysical book store,
    or they could order it for you...I walked in off the street to a
    book store in Ann Arbor and they had it.  Well worth any effort
    it might take on your part to get ahold of it.
    
    Thanks again.

    Re .58 (DW):
    
    >I ask the indulgence of the people here...I'm not trying to turn
    >this into a Christian conference, but from what I've seen from CHRISTIAN
    >so far, I think the responses to 566.51 would have been quite a
    >bit more negative than what I got here, and frankly I don't need
    >the aggravation.  RELIGION I have been told has many people from
    >CHRISTIAN in it, so I'm rather leery of that.
    
    In inverse order:
    
    There are a number of DEJAVU people in RELIGION, too.  That conference
    has its own character.  If you want to try it, do a "select."
    
    Also, the "ground rules" of CHRISTIAN are different.  There are
    some shrill voices among the membership, but there are also many
    calm voices, too.  It's possible to be "comfortable" in many diverse
    conferences.
    
    >If things had worked out the way they could have, there wouldn't
    >be seperate conferences for DEJAVU and CHRISTIAN.
     
    But there _ought_ to be.  Each conference is involved with, for
    want of a better term, could be called its "specialty."  There are
    overlaps, to be sure, but the two aren't supposed to be identical.
    [E.g., there's a long UFO discussion here; do you see that as something
    for CHRISTIAN?  Likewise, there's a doctrinal discussion concerning
    the Mormon faith in CHRISTIAN.  Would that be quite fitting here?]
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.                                                 
    

    
    My goodness, you've all been busy!  Back from AZ with much to read
    and much to say (write).
    
                   
    RE.0 - Lorenzo
    
    One suggestion for cross-posting notes is to specify exactly where
    you are putting them (or intending to put them).  For example:
    
    	"This note also being posted in CHRISTIAN, RELIGION, PHILOSOPHY..."
    
    This way we can *all* benefit from the various diversified responses
    if we so choose to do so, and you would not be accused of 'covert
    actions', as it were.
    
    
    RE. On Religion topics in DEJAVU
    
    I'd have to agree with Doug on this, mostly.  I've been hesitant
    to bring up religious topics or discussions into DEJAVU because
    of the tendency for such discussions to turn into 'holy wars', however
    there is much to be learned from sacred as well as secular sources
    and that none should be discounted or excluded simply because of
    the source.  I would like to 'integrate' as much as possible, because
    that is also a lot of what the 'New Age' means to me.  
    
    And for those who do not wish to participate, there is always the
    NEXT UNSEEN key, which I use even in DEJAVU from time to time.
    
    If everyone would be careful to observe the ground rules of respecting
    other people's right to believe as they so choose WITHOUT fear of
    retribution (hm...sounds like something the forefathers of the US
    Government had in mind....), then we will most likely benefit from
    the discussion (whether it be on crystals or Christianity or...).
                                                             
    
    RE. On 'Baiting Questions'
    
    I would like to see a drastic reduction of these sorts of questions
    in the very near future.
    
    Perhaps a solution would be to approach the question from a different
    angle, such as:
    
    	"*I* believe that the world is in it's last days because of
    	 such-and-such. (Biblical references also welcome if need be).
    
    	"Anyone out there have any thoughts on this topic?"
                       
    By doing this, the seemingly 'hidden agenda' would be a non-issue, 
    because you genuinely would be looking for positive feedback and other 
    points of view simply by stating your point of view up front.
    
    Just a few suggestions.
    
    Cindy
    

    I'm sort of interested in what the Bible was like before the various
    councils got through with it.  I've heard that the references to
    reincarnation etc were held by Gnostics and were later referred to
    as the "Gnostic Heresy".

    Since moving to Colorado Springs I've seen LOTS of rainbows including
    double and triple rainbows and the bona fide end of a rainbow.  It
    was in the parking lot of a Wendy's.  They never fail to fascinate me.

    Mike

    	What never fails to fascinate you, rainbows or Wendy's?
    
    	:^)
    

    RE: .42 (which I just noticed)
    
    "If God is forgiving, then how could any individual who calls himself
    God, punish you for an eternity, for being wrong?"
    
    I don't think he would either, and I don't believe this is the meaning
    Jesus would have wished us to construe from his teachings.  It is
    precisely this type of misconception that so many people have that
    has caused them to turn away from Christianity, without making the
    distinction between Churchianity and Christianity, and whether or
    not they maybe might be able to discard Churchianity and accept
    Christianity.  
    
    "Believe not any man who calls himself Christ"...there may be many
    "false prophets", but wouldn't it be a *shame* to mistake the real
    one for a false one and not believe him.  My belief, confirmed by
    my guide, is that the second coming will indeed happen, that the
    Christ spirit incarnate will again come onto this planet in human
    form, and that he will again be killed by small minded people here,
    but *not* until he has accomplished what he has come here to do.
    
    <my opinion based on my experiences>
    
    RE: .59
    
    Good points, Steve.  On your character recommendation of the people in 
    RELIGION, I will therefore post the note I spoke of earlier, in
    RELIGION, because if I can at least get people to read and
    intelligently consider my opinion there, I think perhaps it might be a 
    more appropriate place, considering the "specialization" you spoke of.
    Thanks.
    
    I will post a pointer note in DEJAVU when I do it, so that those
    who have expressed interest here will have an opportunity to discuss
    the topic in RELIGION.  Again, I'll post it as soon as I can complete
    my research.
    
    Thanks again, people.
    
    DW

re: Doug

Don't worry about your entries, you're doing fine!

re: rainbows

On what was (I think) my 31st birthday, I saw a double rainbow _at night_
in Winchendon, Mass., during a "cats'n'dogs" rainstorm.  It was one of the
weirder things I've seen thus far (right up there with the "two suns" I
saw one winter morning in Ohio--I guess the technical term for that one is
a "sundog"), since the rainbow had no color (except maybe gray)--it was
just two visible arcs in the sky that were lighter than the ambient darkness.

re: Gnostics

Should really check this, but I think there were at least 3 (maybe 4) major
church councils that disposed of various heretical movements--most of what
we know about Gnostic heresies nowadays comes from the (Essene) Dead Sea
Scrolls or from the Nag Hammadi manuscripts.  Of the "non-heretical" NT
material, the synoptic Gospels seem to be _relatively_ free of Gnostic
influence, while John and Paul appear to be more heavily Gnostic-influenced.
Steve K. or Ann Broomhead can probably give a more accurate picture though...

    Re .rainbows:
    
    Those interested in the naturtal aspects of rainbows, moondogs,
    etc., can discuss them in the METEOROLOGY conference.  If you're
    interested, hit the "select" key ...  
    
    
    Re .61 (Mike):
    
    >Since moving to Colorado Springs I've seen LOTS of rainbows including
    >double and triple rainbows and the bona fide end of a rainbow.  It
    >was in the parking lot of a Wendy's. 
     
    Optically, an "end of a rainbow" is some 93,000,000 miles away.
     So an "end of the rainbow" that truly was in a Wendy's parking
    lot is a true paranormal event, worthy of being included in DEJAVU!
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    RE:60
    
      Those are the only conferences, that I had asked that question;
    not to start a debate, but to hear differances of of opinions. One
    thing that I did notice about some of the people in the conferences,
    is that, when a question is asked that's not pleasing to them, they
    rebel against it, But I feel that if they are not happy with the
    questions that are asked, whether they be : religion, psycology,
    theology ETC. they should go on to the next question, and not
    participate; in stead of putting down someone else question. I believe
    that there are people who have differant quetions that they would
    like to ask, but they don't because the fear of being shot down:
    maybe I do it *UNAWARE* IF I DO PLEASE BRING IT TO MY ATTENTION!!
    and don't hold it against me, so let not be so afraid of sharing
    differant opinions. If you look in the other conferences, where
    I had asked that same question, you would see the differant attitudes
    that are there, so lets be careful, and learn to respect other people
    opinions. THAT'S WHY I HARDLY SAID ANYTHING IN THE FIRST QUESTION
    I ASKED IN THIS FILE! I was watching the responses and attitudes:-)
    
    LOERNZO
    

    Re .66 (Lorenzo):
    
    >maybe I do it *UNAWARE* IF I DO PLEASE BRING IT TO MY ATTENTION!!
    >and don't hold it against me, so let not be so afraid of sharing
    >differant opinions. If you look in the other conferences, where
    >I had asked that same question, you would see the differant attitudes
    >that are there, so lets be careful, and learn to respect other people
    >opinions. ...
    
    Amen, Lorenzo!  I guess a point here is that when you first came
    to this conference, your style seemed (and I emphasize "seemed")
    confrontational.  Now that I, for one, am more used to your style,
    I understand it a lot better, and am not off-put by it. 
    
    No problem, my friend; I for one welcome your participation here,
    and I hope our mutual association will be in increasing friendship.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.  

    
    Re.66 - Lorenzo
    
    I believe that part of the problem here is that a lot of participants
    in DEJAVU have been burned before by being 'too honest' and then
    having their 'too honest' answers used at some point in the future
    against them.  Let's face it - quite a few of us have written about
    things that are so far from the norm of being generally accepted
    at face value in society today that they (we) could be described
    as heretics (which in the days of old, and even today, run the risk
    of being persecuted or harassed simply because of their beliefs).
    
    This has happened to me on many occasions, not necessarily in this 
    conference, but in other life situations.  Because of this, I am a 
    bit sensitive to such confrontational questions - not necessarily
    because the questions themselves bother me, rather my answer to
    such a question may be twisted about and used against me in the
    future, and therefore would like to know exactly WHY the question
    is being asked.  If I understand the motivation behind the question
    then there is a much better chance that my answer would be equally
    as honest and forthcoming (and just looking for differing opinions
    is *quite* valid, by the way, but just tell us all up front - that's
    all I'm asking).  
                                 
    On cross-conference posting - while there are many of us who do
    follow the different conferences where you posted the same question,
    there are many who do not, and it is for those people I made the
    request that you put in each of your notes in the different conferences
    where you've also asked the same question.  That is mentioned somewhere
    in a NOTES etiquette document, but unfortunately I cannot find it
    at the moment.
    
    You mentioned bypassing a question if it is not pleasing.  While
    something like that might be the norm (and, in most instances a
    *really* good idea) for a place such as SOAPBOX, I'd like to think 
    that DEJAVU is a place where people don't feel the least bit 
    'threatened' by *any* questions asked - hence my reason for the 
    suggestions in note .60.  DEJAVU is not completely that way....yet, 
    but it could be at some point in the future. 
                      
    Your sharing of your story in the topic "BELIEVE OR NOT BELIEVE"
    was a major step forward in the mutual sharing of personal information.
    You probably noticed the 'opening up' of people in this conference
    *after* you told us a little bit about yourself (myself included).
      
    As we *all* begin to share more details, it becomes a very positive
    experience, but this can only be achieved when everyone is presented
    with a non-threatening environment in which to do this - something
    that I believe DEJAVU is now and will hopefully become moreso in
    the future.  We need more places like DEJAVU in the world - a positive
    environment - a place where nobody is trying to 'fix' others,'convert' 
    others, or 'change' others - a place where we can ultimately be our 
    own true selves without worrying that what we say can and may be 
    used against us.  
                    
    Just think of what a world like that would be.  It is my dream for
    the future that the world eventually will become like this.  
    
    Cindy

    Oh, sorry, I must have dozed off at my keyboard.
    
    Re .60 (Cindy)
    
    	You're OK in my book, kiddo.  Hey, I hear there's a position open
    in the UN.  You interested?
    
    
    						Fred

    (And .68 too!)

    To learn about the Gnostic Gospels, you should look up works by
    Elaine Pagels, who seems to be *the* expert on them.  At least
    one of them was written before any of the accepted gospels (ca.
    50 c.e.).  Using the crude tool of "Religious teachings use the
    techniques of `confrontation' and `interiority'.", she was able
    to distinguish the "heretical" gospels from the accepted ones as
    having 0% confrontational teaching, whereas *all* the accepted
    gospels had at least some confrontational advocacy.
    
    							Ann B.

    Lorenzo et al--
    
    My first thought when I read the topic title, was the recollection
    of a series of "Armageddon" dreams which I was experiencing, with
    disheartening frequency.
    
    However, what has happened, is that the dreams have *stopped* (is
    it inappropriate to "knock on wood" here?!)--
    
    Therefore, to try and separate the message of "clean up your act
    and come to terms with your God" from the possible precognitive
    or clairvoyant visions of "the End" is approaching the Gordian (sp?)
    knot--it is not easily done, for some individuals!
    
    Back to my original point--the dreams of "Armageddon".  These
    dreams were of the vivid type; the ones which I can still remember
    after 6 or 7 years.  The common thread was that the world which
    I knew was destroyed via a cataclysm of some type; people were
    fighting for their food and shelter, the sky was "not right",
    and so on--I was aware of a strong sense of fear and the sure
    knowledge that I was going to survive to see the other side of
    this destruction.
    
    Personally, I would rather be at _ground zero_ than to survive
    in that type of existence!
    
    My family discusses this topic fairly often and we all agree that
    the impending doom syndrome appears to be cyclical.  Let's face
    it, as a previous reply noted, these times are GOOD times,
    compared with what has happened over the last several decades.
    
    I wholeheartedly agree that asking DEJAVU for the opinion of
    how the water is, is a great idea.
    
    God save Jim and Tamy--they have provided a reason for people to
    look at morals and religion in a new light--
    
    As for me, I will re-read "An autobiography of a Yogi"--Yogananda
    provides for further self-help and development.
    
    Be positive---
    
    --Eve
    

    Over in philosophy, I replied: "We are living in the last of the
    FIRST days".
    
    Yes, we can give up like the Mayans. We can pay attention to all
    the negative factors and just fall apart. We can look at the 
    stock market crash and decide to hoard our gold and bring on the
    depression. We can stop working for better understanding between
    the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. because it looks like Armageddon is
    inevitable anyway.
    
    Or ...
    
    We can look at how the human race is becoming more tolerant,
    more loving, and more capable of adapting to environmental
    changes. We can work for 'the kingdom of heaven'.
    
    We went to the moon! We haven't had a world war in forty years!
    
    We are not -- repeat -- not doomed. We are exactly where we
    should be at this stage of our development. We *can* blow it
    if we want, but we can also meet the challenges and reach a
    new plateau.
    
    So, as the last noter put it: "Think positive".
                                                                 
    Am I ready? Yes -- I'm ready to help humanity come to a 
    realization of the kingdom of heaven -- the place where 
    everyone loves their neighbor as themselves. No war. No
    crime. No hunger. Just love. That's what I'm ready for.
    
    		- Larry                              
    

    Guess what? Mikie? made a discovery this week of something that
    probably all of you already knew.
    
    Religious experience, especially western religious experience, is
    psychic in nature.                                            
    
    As such mysticism is a vital part of religious experience.
    
    So just how much psychic activity is religious? 
      
    

    re:	.74
    
    	Why is there always a question mark at the end of your name,
    	Mikie?
    
    					Carla
    

    Reply to .75; Carla,
    
    It's a name with inflection. As if someone were questioning and
    protesting at the same time. Sort of a whine too.. B^)

    I adopted the name when in Bible or in Christian, I can't remember
    now, someone accused me of really being Elizabeth. The questioning
    tone has now evolved into a questioning/whining tone.

    I believe it was Bible.
    
    Someone in that file noticed that Mikie? and I are both from Colorado
    Springs.  Based on that, and that we share a number of views (at
    least from the perspective of the folks in the Bible conference
    who hold very different views), and that we were tending to Note
    at the same times, approximately, he deduced that we must be the
    same person with two accounts.
    
    That's strange.  We don't look alike.  Besides, I don't remember
    writing all those notes signed Mikie? :^)
    
    It has surprised me to no end the people who still believe that
    Mikie? and I are the same person.
    
    Elizabeth (not Mikie?)

    I have met Elizabeth and have seen Mikie and I assure you they don't
    even look alike (chuckle, chuckle).
    
    Back to my cave,
    
    Pat

                            
    Back to Mikie's original question....
    
    According to the small bit of Carl Jung I've read recently, all
    psychic activity comes from the 'unconscious'.  He eludes to the
    possibility that 'God' exists in the unconscious (that 80% of our
    brain that is under utilitzed).
                        
    The best book I can recommend is his last book entitled "The Unexplored
    Self", written in 1957.  It is short, concise and easily
    understandable if you know the basic psych terms (if not, read 
    'The Road Less Traveled' by Scott Peck and this will set the stage 
    for you quite nicely - as he is definitely a Jung disciple of sorts).
                                   
    After 'The Unexplored Self', there is 'Modern Man In Search Of His
    Soul' which is lengthy.  
    
    Jung also believes that it is impossible to become in touch with
    the unconscious until we personally experience an event in our lives
    which appears to be directed by a 'higher power', such as a miracle
    of serendipity and the recognition of synchronicity (more Peck than
    Jung here, only because I'm more familiar with Peck's works) and
    also a recognition of the goodness in the world.
    
    The stages that Peck talks about are based on his experience as
    a practicing psychoanalyst, and are also found in the Religions
    and World Peace topic in greater detail.  
    
    Based on my own recent experience, I truly believe that what Peck
    writes is true - having traveled essentially through the stages
    that he writes about.  I was stuck in what he refers to as Stage
    III - skepticism/atheistism/agnosticism for the better part of the
    last 20 years and was helped greatly by reading his story and realizing
    that fundamentalist Christianity wasn't the *only* game in town
    (which is something that went totally against my nature and beliefs,
    given that I was probably a fundamentalist Christian for all of
    15 seconds when I did make the jump around age 7 or so).  His writings
    are what brought me back to Christianity - but this is different for 
    everyone, of course.  I also believe, as he states, that God does
    the directing and that we can't get there by ourselves.  At first
    glance that may seem like a statement of powerlessness, however
    it is anything but that.
    
    I also believe that personal power comes when one begins to draw
    the unconscious into the conscious.  Part of that is the 'negative
    ego' or 'evil' by another name.  Jung states that we all are part
    of the 'collective Shadow' - that part of humankind responsible
    for the atrocities in the world, but that we truly have the power
    within ourselves (God or rather the indwelling Holy Spirit) to master
    the 'negative ego' and to create an environment of love and harmony.
    
    Back to the statement on powerlessness - it is only when we are
    in the grasp of the 'negative ego' that we are truly powerless.
    Jesus realized this when he was being crucified and said, "Father,
    forgive them for they know not what they do."  The people who are
    under the 'negative ego' influence, in my experience, do not understand
    the hurt and the pain they inflict on other people because they
    live their lives in a state of less (much less) than maximum awareness
    (quoting Peck again).  These people are to be pitied (but more
    importantly forgiven and loved) because they are so blind and lost.
    They prey on easy victims because they have a need to 'control'
    something.  Love can change this, but it takes an extreme amount
    of love to overcome the 'negatives'.  More people are needed in
    this world who possess the capability of absorbing the evil and 
    dissapating it so that it is not passed down blindly through the 
    generations.
    
    That is why 'to love yourself' is the greatest love of all, because
    it is only then that you can 'love your neighbors as yourself' and
    eventually love God (or insert diety name of your choice here).
    
    Hope this helps somewhat.
    
    Cindy

    
         I'd have to agree with .73 in the sense that we are not
    approaching an ultimate, destructive total doomsday. Like they 
    said before the Harmonic Convergence, there is a period of accele-
    ration of negative energies that we will experience for sometime,
    before "the dawn". For me, the line that sums it up best is the
    words they flashed on the screen at the end of the first "Star Trek"
    movie:
    
                  "THE HUMAN ADVENTURE IS JUST BEGINNING"
       
    Roy
    
    

    Is this the beginning of a positive New Age, yes.
    
    Can mankind still screw it up?  Easily.
    
    Right now, I'll give us a 50-50 chance of global survival until
    2050.  If we survive until then, we would have gone through the rougher
    times.
    
    We have environmental poisoning, men of power obsessed with domination
    and military might littered throughout the world, economic instability,
    and the masses are turning illiterate.  Sure, we can look out from
    our soft little cubicles and say how great the world is, but don't
    take on ostrich tactics and say the world is in fine shape, because
    it isn't.  IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE BEAUTIFUL, but the future of
    this world is in our hands, not our ancestors, not our children,
    but *US*.  What have you done to make this a better place to live?
    
    If you cut your arm, would you treat it or ignore it?
    
    Dave

    RE.-1 - Dave 
    
    > What have you done to make the world a better place?
    
    This is a question which might tend to make others defensive.  
    
    The only person you can change is yourself.  Perhaps it would be
    better for you to state what you have done and then others may follow
    your lead.  Peace and social change, like charity, begins at home.
                                                      
    To answer your question a bit more straightforwardly - I try to
    smile and to treat others as I would like to be treated.
    
    In addition to this, I've joined Amnesty International and have
    posted the literature in this conference.  Why this, you might ask?
    Well, I've never gone hungry, never had cancer, don't have children
    and don't have the firsthand experience from these situations to
    draw from and therefore decided that I am not really qualified to
    *best* serve society in these ways.  
    
    I *have* lived under the threat (or implied threat) of abuse as a 
    powerless victim.  Fortunately that was long ago, but the memory of 
    that experience will always remain with me.  In other words, I can 
    relate to victims.  I could remain angry (and did for a long time), 
    but I'm turning that anger into something productive now through 
    sharing that knowledge in a way that will benefit others through
    my future work with AI.
                                                 
    The world today must undergo some major changes and I don't believe
    anyone has written otherwise (except perhaps for the doom-and-gloom
    types who believe that it is going to take an 'act from above' to
    get us out of the mess we're in today - a belief which I do not
    subscribe to, by the way).  We can change the world - we do have
    the power, but most people just don't realize that....yet.  That
    is where we must begin.  We must begin to love.  Love begats love
    and light begats light and so on.
    
    So start small - *smile* at your neighbor.  If that is all you do
    for the rest of your life, then you have succeeded in making the
    world a better place.  We all are called to action in different
    ways, depending on the time and money available and the prior life
    experiences which shaped our realities up to this point that we
    can draw upon.
    
    Reading through Martin Luther King's speech "I Have A Dream" also
    may supply you with a few goals for the future.  We must begin to
    dream again.
    
    Cindy

    I'm sorry if I have offended anyone.
    
    Please, allow me to explain.  I don't consider myself a "Gloom and
    Doomer,"  even though I may be a little pessimistic.  I have looked
    around this world with (I think) open eyes and I see a lot of problems.
    That's okay, nothing is perfect, I understand that.  What I don't
    like seeing is that nobody is addressing these issues.  I'm hearing
    a lot of "It's not my job buddy" and the problems are being avoided.
    
    The two greatest problems that are facing mankind today is nuclear
    war and ecological poisoning.  Overall, I think that the chances
    of nuclear war are being reduced every day and I think this is a
    healthy sign.  We're not under the woods yet, but we know the direction
    to take.
    
    Ecological poisoning is another problem, I'm worried that we may
    distroy ourselves and I don't see our opinions changing.  (The chances
    are not reducing every day.)  I'll get into this sometime this weekend.
    
    Dave

    
    	Quite a number of my friends and aqquantences have remarked;
    "Well, if things get that bad, I don't want to be here."   or,
    "If they drop 'the big one' I'm gonna watch it from my roof".
    
    	It seems to me that a real large number of people are
    preparing themselves psychologically to 'check out' just as
    soon as the going gets rough.    I see this type of behavior
    in many different modes, all the way from "party til you drop",
    to semi-deliberate apathetic total lack of preparedness.
    
    	I do see some rough times coming, but, personally,  I look on 
    it as a challenge worth facing.   I partially agree with Dave Doucette in
    .83 where he notes;
    
>> What I don't like seeing is that nobody is addressing these issues.
    
    The people who go on believing in the status quo, while it is so
    obviously cracking apart around them, those people also have head
    firmly implanted in the sand.    I do know several people who *are*
    taking appropriate action, it seems, however, that only a very
    few of us will truely be ready, if the future does turn strange
    on us.

    	Indeed, I am puzzled and concerned by the number of people who
    seem to be waiting for the moment they can "check out early".
    Someone who has already subconsciously made this decision might
    be expected to deny the need for preparation and action.    I
    believe that much more than 50% of the people may fall into this
    category, and the rest of us will find difficulty in addressing
    the real problems until after the apathetic masses have gone ahead
    and "checked out."     Or perhaps, alternatively, events may wake
    up some of these people, reminding them of the desire to live.
        
    	Alan.

Below is a letter I'm planning to send to some politicians, If you agree
with what I say, feel free to reword and send it to your favorite
congressman/senator/whatever.

Dear Sir,

I am writing this letter to you because I am concerned that a global
problem is being ignored.  Over the past few years, there has
been an increase in the number of global ecological disasters, but no
precautions have been made to address the risk of similar accidents
occurring in the future.  I'm not referring to local toxic spills like
Baird and McGuire chemical plant in Holbrook, Massachusetts, but accidents
which have made international front-page news over the past few years.  We
may find ourselves moving towards ecological upheaval which could occur
within my lifetime.  I am in my mid-twenties and expecting to live for
another fifty years, at least that's what statistics say.  Fifty years is a
long time.  Some of the ecological disasters that have occurred in the past
few years will effect the earth and mankind throughout my life and long
after my death.  These disasters have become ecological scars that litter
the Earth.  The disasters I'm talking about are:

Bohopol, India:  December 1984.  An accident at a Union Carbide chemical
plant released a toxic cloud over a highly-populated area of the town.
Twenty five hundred people were killed and tens of thousands seriously
injured or permanently maimed by the worst industrial accident in the
history of mankind.

Chernobyl, USSR:  April 1986.  An explosion at a Nuclear power plant kills
thirty one people.  The first evidence of the accident outside of the
Soviet Union was an increase in radiation levels at a powerplant in Sweden.
There were about 200 reported cases of radiation sickness and possibly five
thousand will eventually die from exposure to the radiation released in the
explosion.

Basel, Switzerland:  November 1986:  A fire at the Santoz Chemical Company
near the Rhine river resulted in over thirty tons of Chemicals washed into
the Rhine river from water used to put out the blaze.  Six days later, a
containment system gave way and spilled more chemicals into the Rhine.
While no person was killed the accident, one of Europe's finest rivers died
and ecological havoc spread throughout its length.  Cleanup may take over
twenty years.

East Coast Of United States:  Summer '87.  Hundreds of dolphins have washed
ashore dead or dying with skin abrasions and/or lung problems.  Bathers of
New Jersey beaches have complained of similar symptoms.  One of the
possible explanations could be a toxic waste dump a hundred miles off the
New Jersey coast.  Presently, nobody knows for sure.


Taken as isolated cases they're accidents, combined they tell of the
fallibility of mankind.  We're not perfect, accidents will continue to
happen as long as mankind continues his search for knowledge.  There are
other ecological disasters, most stem from the ignorance of man and his
effect on the environment.  They are even more widespread and devastating,
even though their effects may not be felt for decades.  These problems
include:

*	The pollution of the Mediterranean Sea which has been increasing
over the past few decades.  It takes a hundred years for water to get out
of the Sea to the ocean.  The same surrounding countries which prospered
from its waters in previous generations are slowly killing the sea.  The
poisoning of the Mediterranean may become a possible case study for the
poisoning of our oceans.

* 	Acid Rain that effects the lakes and trees of the Northeast and
Canada.  I have driven through evergreen forests of my parent's homeland in
Novia Scotia and saw the tops of the trees browned and dying from the
acidity of the rainfall.

*	The destruction of the rainforests in South America which is
annihilating whole species of life every day.  These forests hold the most
abundant forms of life on this planet, but we are losing the rainforests at
an alarming rate.  How can we replenish a form of life if it no longer
exists?

How many accidents of this magnitude can the Earth survive?  If we discover
that we can kill life within the Mediterranean, then how much longer will
it take for us to make the great oceans uninhabitable?  Accidents may take
decades, or even centuries for Earth to recover.  Will it become a matter
of time until an accident occurs that will make this planet uninhabitable
for man?

You can't predict when and where accidents and disasters will occur, but
they seem to be occurring about once a year on the average.  The next
accident could occur in Boston, or Whales, or Japan.  Unfortunately,
accidents occur with the random hand of fate.  Risks can be reduced, but
they can't be eliminated no matter how may precautions are taken.
Ecological disasters can start with any type of accident:  industrial,
fire, transportation, anything!  Once the accident occurs, all that can be
done is clean up, and the sooner the better.  Accidents of this magnitude
and scale can exceed the capabilities for local, or even national
governments to respond.  What is needed is global leadership to address the
problem of cleaning up after global disasters.  Governments of the world
should pool resources to clean up after disasters --ecological, natural or
otherwise.

A "global superfund" will allow resources to be combined on a global scale
to repair damage that mankind has inflicted on this fragile world.  There
is the advantages in economics of scale and sharing the experience of
solving problems associated with these disasters, The superfund would be a
form of peaceful cooperation between countries.  Eventually, this
organization could educate the governments of the world how to stop these
problems from reoccuring again in their parts of the world, and eliminating
ineffective clean-ups of a disaster resulting from the lack of experience
in dealing with such problems.  We have to learn that we are the keepers of
this garden we call Earth.  It may not be the Garden of Eden, but it's all
we have.


						Sincerely,

						Dave Doucette

    
    I'm really sorry, Dave.  Never meant to imply that you are a 'doom
    and gloom' type at all (indeed you are far from it). Please accept 
    my apology.
    
    There are serious problems in the world today.  A lot of people
    cannot see any solutions, and therefore feel powerless.  This is
    a major hurdle that a lot of people have to overcome - they really
    aren't powerless at all, and the future of the world depends on
    each individual.
    
    There are also so many problems that it is often hard to decide
    where to spend the time to try to address that which needs addressing.
                    
    Your letter was a great start.  Perhaps you could take that and
    start a topic all your own, as it seems like you know much more
    about that particular area that others of us (or at least me anyway). 
    I have lots of questions on lots of topics (including the topic
    you mentioned), and if there are people like you who have answers 
    (or some really good ideas) then we've got something here.    
    
    Perhaps others would start their own topics where their expertise
    lies, and one by one we will start to chisel away at the problems
    that the world is facing today.
                                           
    I'll take on the task of researching Amnesty Int'l, someone else
    might be able to speak about SDI and nuclear weapons, someone else
    on child abuse, someone else on world hunger and poverty......
    
    How about it?
    
    Cindy

    Cindy,
    
    No problem.  Apology accepted.
    
    Maybe it would be worthwhile to create a new Notes file (ACTION?)
    which focuses on answering questions and transferring non-technical
    information, or at least pointing people in the right direction
    to find it.
    
    As an example:
    
    I'm working on (yet another ;-) ) political letter concerning
    disarmament.  I'm looking for information about the following countries
    in the following areas:
    
    For each year (1984-1986)
    
    Country  Defense($)	Def.% Bug. Budget  GNP	Bug.% GNP	Def.% GNP
    USA
    Great Britian
    West Germany
    Japan
    Canada
    -------
    USSR
    East Germany
    ?
    
    I went into the Boston Public Library and looked it up in World
    Bank references.  The latest they had was 1983 (phooey!).  Can anyone
    lead me into the right direction to find this info?
    
    Thanx!
    Dave
    

    Hi.  I liked your letter very much and I think it should be sent
    via mass mailing to ALL senators/congressmen/local counsellors.
    The Earth is in a lot of trouble if more than a few of us don't
    start recognizing the warning signs mentioned in your letter.
    
    I was watching a documentary on Channel 2 sometime late last week
    and it was discussing a new plant being built in Detroit that was
    going to be dumping into the Great Lakes (again!).  Canada is opposed
    to this because they are "upwind" and may inherit the
    toxins/pollutants.  The U.S thinks Canada is doing most of the harm
    because Canada has (I think) 11 or so of these plants along the
    Lakes.  It's a matter of who is blaming who for the most damage.
    They don't realize that ANY damage is too much damage at all!
    I'm behind your letter 100%.  If you have a way to send it to every
    person in the WORLD, do it!
    
    Oh, one small comment - in your paragraph concerning acid rain -
    "effects" should be "affects".

    Thank you for the feedback (including the corection).  I'm planning
    to send the letter to a dozen or so politicians using Microsoft
    Works with a form letter capability (ain't computers wonderful!
    ;-) ).
    
    If you agree with it, *PLEASE* send it to your representatives!
    Show that a grass roots organization is possible.  (p.s. It's going
    out in the Usenet.politics tonight...)
    
    One comment:
    As a citizen, you have the right to send political letters to whoever
    you choose.  With the computer, you can send "personalized" letters
    to politicans with *VERY* little effort.  I posted a topic in
    PHILOSOPHY called "Primary Summits" which was a letter sent to 9
    presidential candidates and 15 media organizations, once I got the
    letter written, it took me about two nights to print it out and
    write the enevelopes.  The hardest part was the research and I thought
    it was well worth the effort.  Heck, it was fun.
    
    The two letters I'm working on now are going to be directed more
    towards politicians and less towards the media. 
    
    Dave

Re: .85

	While an accident within Whales would probably be very upsetting to
the Whales involved, you might find polititions more sympathetic if you point
out the possibility of an accident in Wales.

Mark

RE: .89
    
    Further comment -- keep in mind however that it is very likely that
    the computer you are using belongs to DEC rather than you.  DEC
    has very legitimate concerns about its property being used for
    "political" purposes.  You should be very, very careful that DEC
    is in no way associated with your political activism (which, just
    to be clear, I personally support).  Even your letter published
    here comes dangerously close to crossing the line.  If we are not
    careful, DEC will be forced to stop supporting this marvelous medium
    of communication.
    
    Public speech is free, but this network is *not* public and DEC
    is at least partially legally responsible for what gets said over
    it.  Your letter, for example, could be used in court as evidence
    that *DEC* has a particular stance on the issue.  Yes, I know that
    that is silly, but taken out of context, it may not appear so in
    court.
    
    					Topher

                    
    Proposed name for new conference - GRASSROOTS ACTION.
    
    Proposed scope - Worldwide.
    
    Proposed topics - non-profit organizations, names and addresses
                      of politians, statistics, letter templates,
    		      hot issues, etc.
    
    What say you all?
    
    Cindy

    Go for it.

    
    Unfortunately, due to time and system constraints, I can't start a 
    conference.
    
    Any takers?
    
    Topher is correct - we do have to be careful about the legal aspects
    of such a conference.
                           
    Cindy

    I can't because of the same constraints, even though I'll volinteer
    to be one (of a few) moderators.
    
    While I agree that we have to watch out for legal implications, I
    don't think we have a walk on eggshells. . . Just look over in
    soapbox. 8*D
    

    
    Yes, another conference where Pat Robertson is being discussed also
    comes to mind.
    
    If the action conference doesn't become a reality, then at least
    you might want to consider starting a topic geared toward ecology.
    Given the discussions on Mother Earth, etc., that fits in here quite
    well.....
    
    Cindy                                                             

    As promised, here are some biblical references which, depending on how 
    you interpret them, are quite interesting.  They touch on some topics 
    that I will be discussing in RELIGION once I complete my readings and 
    research.
    
    Matthew 13:10-17
    Mark 4:11
    Luke 8:10	
    Romans 11:25, 16:25
    I Corinthians 2:7, 4:1, 13:2, 14:2, 15:51
    Ephesians 1:9, 3:3-4, 3:9, 5:32
    Colossians 1:26-27, 2:2, 4:3
    II Thessalonians 2:7
    I Timothy 3:9, 3:16
    Revelation 10:7
    
    These references were organized within and taken from the book "The
    Secret Doctrines of Jesus" by H. Spencer Lewis (I think I mistakenly
    referred to Ralph Lewis as the author before).  
    
    The three books I mentioned earlier, The Secret Doctrines of Jesus,
    The Mystical Life of Jesus, and The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the
    Christ, should all still be available through:
    
    Rosicrucian Supply Bureau
    Rosicrucian Park
    San Jose, CA  95114
    
    I would write and ask for a catalog first, from which I would order
    the books.
    
    I am leaving it up to the reader of these books as to their accuracy
    and the research of their accuracy (part of what I'm doing now)...
    
    As I said, when I post my note in RELIGION I will post a pointer
    note in DEJAVU so anyone who wants to go over to RELIGION and join
    any ensueing discussion, may do so.
    
    BTW, I've seen a lot of discussion about the environment here. 
    You might be interested in the book "Nature's End" which I referred
    to in 566(.66?) and quoted from in the note BABYLON.  It's *quite*
    interesting reading, with a lot of ideas about computers too.  I
    listed the authors in the note BABYLON (in the 400 range of past
    notes, I think.
    
    DW

    
    
    Doug,
    
    Thanks for the effort in putting together the biblical references
    in .98, and for the future writing you are going to do in RELIGION
    :-).  I went back and read BABYLON (#446) and was surprised to find
    that I had missed it back in August.  It brought tears to my eyes.
    Though the discussion you had hoped for did not happen with that note,
    I feel that it has been picked up here and perhaps the outgrowth of
    this will be the forum you had hoped for.
    
    Dave D. - thanks for your efforts too!.
    
    Carole
    
    P.S.  Sometimes it takes awhile for a seed to germinate!
    

    Carole, thanks for the thanks, but the credit for putting those
    references together belongs to H. Spencer Lewis, I just copied them
    out of his book.
    
    Happy Thanksgiving.
    
    Doug

    Anyone interested in the last direction this topic took (suppressed
    teachings of Christ) owes it to him/herself to read note 142.17
    in the RAJA::RELIGION conference.  I don't know if I could really
    add to what she said, so I may not post the note I discussed earlier.
    
    Bravo.  Should be required reading for every DEJAVUer.
    
    Doug