Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Klemp Proves: Religion is Religion=Myth & Lies

Expand Messages
  • prometheus_973
    Hi Etznab and All, Yes, it does look like Twit and Klemp were/are as confused as most ECKists are when suggesting this time-line with Lemuria and the Aryans,
    Message 1 of 6 , Dec 11, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Etznab and All,
      Yes, it does look like Twit and Klemp were/are as confused
      as most ECKists are when suggesting this time-line with
      Lemuria and the Aryans, Garden of Eden, Adom & Ede, etc.
      The difference is that there are supposed to be ECK Masters,
      like ASOKI, that the Mahanta should be in communication with
      in order to sort out the details for clarification (if Eckankar
      dogma were true). A real Mahanta wouldn't be contradicting
      himself when there are supposed to be other "Living" Masters
      to assist him. Plus, isn't the LEM/Mahanta supposed to have
      access to all of those "inner" records? This proves it's all a
      load of crap!

      The problem for Klemp is with the Internet. All Information
      is easier to access and this makes lies easier to uncover. This
      is also why HK came up with his EMR disease (circa 1990)
      because he knew many ECKists would form these symptoms
      due to auto suggestion and wanting to emulate HK as a martyr
      or as a karmic test for mastership. Therefore, the EMR disease
      would keep them away from their computers.

      "[....] These records tell us that the legendary paradise
      of man, thought of as the GARDEN of EDEN, was laid on the
      lost continent of LEMURIA which was Sunk by earthquakes
      and tidal waves FIFTY THOUSAND YEARS AGO. [....]" [Based on:
      Paul Twitchell, The Shariyat-Ki- Sugmad, Book Two, 2nd.
      Edition - 1988, p. 107]

      BTW- The ARYANS are supposed to be the "CURRENT" ROOT RACE
      according to Klemp's Eckankar Lexicon!

      "[....] The Destruction of the kingdom of LEMURIA and all
      its colonial empire came about by gas pockets under the
      crust of the earth some HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of YEARS
      AGO. It was a land of the ARYANS who spread the empire
      throughout the world. [....]" [Based on: Paul Twitchell,
      The Shariyat-Ki- Sugmad, Book Two, seventh printing,
      1982, p. 97 & eighth printing, 1986, p. 97 ]

      Also, I can't seem to find where GAKKO (the man) is said to
      come from VENUS. Does someone know where this is mentioned.
      I know that it is somewhere! Strange, that it's not mentioned in
      the Shariyat! Instead, Twit talks of "the Gakko."

      Prometheus

      etznab writes:
      >
      >
      > > It was some years ago that I attempted to plot traditional
      > > dates and trivia for the four great ages spoken about in the
      > > past by various cultures.
      > >
      > > I also provided quotes form the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad that
      > > appeared contradictory.
      > >
      > > Seldom do I provide commentary for the events recorded
      > > on my timeline, but in this case I made an exception.
      > >
      > > This post is in response to the one by Prometheus about
      > > the continent of Lemuria in context to the four ages in Hindu
      > > tradition.
      > >
      > > The commentary to which I refer is appended to
      > > the Treta Yuga entry for the year 2,163,102 B.C.at:
      > >
      > > http://mirrorh.com/timeline4mbc.html
      > >
      > > (The date is questionable, so I highlight it in purple).
      > >
      > > The commentary and Shariyat quotes appear here:
      > >
      > > http://mirrorh.com/mu.html
      > >
      > > This was a page I created years ago to supplement my
      > > B.C. timeline.
      > >
      > > Looking at the dates, something appears awry (IMO).
      > >
      > > At the same time, I have seen a number of dates for the
      > > four ages in Hindu tradition. Not to mention, several different
      > > dates for the history of MU.
      > >
      > > What struck me as peculiar were the two Shariyat quotes
      > > - separated by only a number of pages - where the dates for
      > > the destruction of Lemuria appear (to me) to differ by about
      > > 2 million years!
      > >
      > > Even after many years, I'm still trying to figure this one out.
      > >
      > > Etznab
      > >
      >
      > In The Lost Continent Of Mu, by James Churchward and
      > Neville Spearman, Chap. 7, p. 129 is called:
      >
      > AGE OF MU'S CIVILIZATION
      >
      > I believe this book was published around 1931:
      > (some beginning pages are torn out in my copy)
      >
      > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_(lost_continent)
      >
      > The first paragraph of that chapter reads:
      >
      > I HAVE asserted that the civilization of Mu dates back
      > to more than 50,000 years ago. Now let us see on what
      > foundation I base such date. [....]
      >
      > Does 50,000 sound familiar?
      >
      > "[....] These records tell us that the legendary paradise
      > of man, thought of as the Garden of Eden, was laid on the
      > lost continent of Lemuria which was sunk by earthquakes
      > and tidal waves fifty thousand years ago. [....]" [Based on:
      > Paul Twitchell, The Shariyat-Ki- Sugmad, Book Two, 2nd.
      > Edition - 1988, p. 107]
      >
      > On p. 57 of The Lost Continent Of Mu, Chap. 3 entitled:
      > THE LAND OF MAN'S ADVENT ON EARTH, the first par-
      > agraph reads:
      >
      > "IN the land of Mu we have unquestionably found where
      > man made his advent upon the earth. Various records con-
      > clusively prove that this land was the Biblical Garden of
      > Eden; [....]"
      >
      > *********
      >
      > The reason for another older date for the destruction of
      > Mu comes from the following:
      >
      > "[....] The destruction of the kingdom of Lemuria and all
      > its colonial empire came about by gas pockets under the
      > crust of the earth some hundreds of thousands of years
      > ago. It was a land of the Aryans who spread the empire
      > throughout the world. [....]" [Based on: Paul Twitchell,
      > The Shariyat-Ki- Sugmad, Book Two, seventh printing,
      > 1982, p. 97 & eighth printing, 1986, p. 97 ]
      >
      > A newer revised version of this section reads:
      >
      > "[....] The destruction of the kingdom of Lemuria and all
      > its colonial empire came about by gas pockets under the
      > crust of the earth that formed some hundreds of thousands
      > of years ago. [....]" [Based on: Paul Twitchell, The Shariyat-
      > Ki- Sugmad, Book Two, Second Edition - 1988, p. 112]
      >
      > This newer version appears (to me) to be the more correct.
      > However, it was millions of years ago (one would think) when
      > gas chambers were formed in the Earth - and at the time the
      > earth was cooling from molten to solid.
      > The oldest rocks on earth date back to between 4 and 5
      > billion years ago! During the Archeozoic Era.
      >
      > I wonder if, perhaps, Paul Twitchell gathered some of the
      > information about Earth history from books that he read. Be-
      > cause, obviously, some of this information (about Lemuria),
      > "apparently" was in print years before Paul Twitchell wrote
      > the Shariyat.
      >
      > A problem that could result from basing history on books
      > (if indeed that was the case with Paul Twitchell with regard
      > to ancient Earth history), as I see it, is that any incorrect
      > information in such books would have to be corrected by
      > someone else later on. And if the source books contained
      > any incorrect, or uncertain information (like if it was based
      > on theory, on myth, or legend then it would remain a subject
      > for further research and investigation.
      >
      > Personally, I don't know about many religions that update
      > their history if (and when) new information proves the old to
      > be incorrect and/or false. At least, not when new data is so
      > very different from the old. In this case it could take - and it
      > has - hundreds of years for some religions to accept what is
      > closer to being the actual truth. IMO.
      >
      > It looks to me that Eckankar did make a correction in the
      > right direction, by illustrating that it was "gas pockets under
      > the crust of the earth that formed some hundreds of thousands
      > of years ago" and not necessarily "The destruction of the king-
      > dom of Lemuria" that happened then.
      >
      > In spite of that, however, the Treta Yuga appears to have
      > begun around 2 million-something years ago. And in another
      > place it looks like Lemuria sank before that:
      >
      > "[....] The Tretya Yuga, or Silver Age, came after the breakup
      > of the previous age, when Lemuria, by earthquakes and tidal
      > waves, went down under the seas. [....]"
      >
      > [Based on: Paul Twitchell, The Shariyat-Ki- Sugmad, Book
      > Two, p. 113, Second Edition - 1988]
      >
      > How can Lemuria get destroyed before the Treta Yuga
      > and also at around 50,000 years ago? This is a question
      > I'm still trying to answer.
      >
      > The time span between these two versions, it appears
      > to be a difference of over 2 million years!
      >
      > Maybe there needs to be a correction here. IMO.
      >
      > Etznab
    • etznab@aol.com
      An apparent contrast between the Lemuria timelines in Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad Book One vs. Book Two, IMO, seems connected to the Hindu Yugas. Book One mentions
      Message 2 of 6 , Dec 12, 2007
      • 0 Attachment

           An apparent contrast between the Lemuria timelines
        in Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad Book One vs. Book Two, IMO,
        seems connected to the Hindu Yugas.

           Book One mentions these Yugas in the first chapter.
        It is in the 3rd chapter, however, that spells out the root
        races of the Earth (including the Lemurian).

           In The Doctrine of the Eck Marg chapter from Shariyat-
        Ki-Sugmad, Book One, the root races appear to be more
        or less referenced in accord with classic history. However,
        it is not until the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Book Two, until the
        timeline for Lemuria appears in context to the four Yugas
        from Hindu tradition.

           What this does is pushes the timeline way, way back
        in my opinion). Millions of years, in fact! And in Book 2
        the Polarian race that included Adom & Ede appears to
        get eclipsed by Lemuria "thought of as the Garden of
        Eden" (The Records of the Kros - 1st page).

           Here, in Book Two, it also alludes to the continent of
        Lemuria sunk by earthquakes and tidal waves 50,000
        years ago:

        "[....] These records tell us that the legendary paradise
        of man, thought of as the Garden of Eden, was laid on the
        lost continent of Lemuria which was sunk by earthquakes
        and tidal waves fifty thousand years ago. [....]"

        [The Shariyat-Ki- Sugmad, Book Two, Second Edition -
        1988, p. 107]

           Then, just so many pages later:

        "[....] The Tretya Yuga, or Silver Age, came after the breakup
        of the previous age, when Lemuria, by earthquakes and tidal
        waves, went down under the seas. [....]"

        [The Shariyat-Ki- Sugmad, Book Two, p. 113, Second Edition
        - 1988] 

        *********

           Supposing that Lemuria didn't come to an end until 50,000
        years ago (whatever), then obviously Lemuria could not have
        gone "down under the seas" before the Silver Age began so
        many million years ago.

           The numbers just don't add up unless Lemuria survived the
        first cataclysm millions of years ago (IMO).

           I've seen lots of dates in various traditions/mythology's for
        the Four Ages and/or the Four Root Races. I'm not saying
        that I know for certain which ones are correct. The point for
        joining this topic concerns what the teachings of Eckankar
        appear to say about the topic, along with what are my own
        opinions/observations and/or understanding about it based
        upon further research.

           The lesson I learn from looking at the stories from the
        Shariyat is to take another look at what it illustrates for
        ancient Earth history. (BTW, ancient history is a favored
        topic of study for me. One that I've been looking at for a
        number of years now.) I'm learning to ask myself where
        the information came from really, because it's common
        when writing about ancient history for writers to quote a
        previous written source. The reason is that nothing else
        remains in the way of a living eye witness account, so
        all you have to go on is what exists as ancient ruins.

           Now, of course, if there were a spiritual traveler or an
        all-knowing master with access to the actual truth, one
        would probably not expect to find such widely-differing
        illustrations of fact. Especially not ones that have to be
        corrected years later, unless somebody put down the
        wrong information to begin with.

           Forgive me for writing at lengh on this one, but the
        subject is a personal favorite of exploration.

           Over the years when I see questionable, conflicting
        and hard to believe information about ancient history I
        naturally want to begin looking at its composition. In
        fact, the history of the composition of history, where
        the one does not necessarily equate to the other, or
        writing it down in a book does not necessarily make
        something out to be automatically true. No matter
        what the name of the alleged author which, again,
        writing down a word does not necessarily make it
        real in the sense of "historically true". Bugs Bunny
        is a historical truth, but the historical truth of imag-
        ination! He is an imaginary character!

           In other words, animation depends on a living
        being to animate the imaginary character. When
        the animator of the character departs, all that is
        left is the history of an animation. In other words,
        records which can be played over and over again.
        They will never amount to anything new, but will
        play the same pictures over and over again just
        as they were first composed. New animations
        amount to a new animator, IMO, compared to
        the older forms on record.

           Much that I have seen in the way of ancient
        history was the product of imagination. Myths
        are a good example of imaginary history, IMO.
        Sometimes its bits and pieces of actual events
        recorded along with what somebody imagined
        to be the whole story - because they simply
        couldn't remember, or they never saw the rest
        of it. The whole picture.

           Again, I think this happens with ancient history
        because the people who actually witnessed it are
        gone. It's as if the "life" were gone out of it and all
        that remained were so many inanimate objects.
        Books, stories, legends and myths. IMO, we can
        animate the remains, but can we bring back the
        actual life of the previous witness? Can we bring
        back Paul Twitchell and ask him to explain what
        he meant, and why?

           Well, how about the people who wrote ancient
        history, but at the same time were removed from
        it by hundreds, thousands, or millions of years?
        Or how about those who weren't, but who were
        removed nevertheless?

           I think we have to research, investigate, and
        rediscover the truth for ourselves whenever the
        truth appears obviously incredible. Future gen-
        erations might even come to thank us for it. In
        my opinion. (Especially if we ourselves happen
        to become those future generations.)

        Etznab




          



        **************************************
        See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.