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

Re: Adams Sister Soul

Expand Messages
  • Steve Hale
    ... Christ entered as Ego at 29 years. The soul of Jesus receives this influence for three and a half years as irradiating sun forces. Then the body
    Message 1 of 18 , Aug 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "dottie zold"
      <dottie_z@y...> wrote:
      > Stephen:
      > > Jesus retained his soul until the very end.
      >
      > I would like to know where my teacher speaks of this if you know? In
      > all his works I have not found it. If this is your own inspiration I
      > would be interested in knowing from whence it comes. Can you trace it
      > back to whence it arose? If you can not that is fine.
      >
      > Dottie

      Christ entered as Ego at 29 years. The soul of Jesus receives this
      influence for three and a half years as irradiating sun forces. Then
      the body disappears. It arose with Jesus, but where did it go?

      We know that the Buddha stream and the Zarathurstra stream converged in
      the young boy at twelve, and he retained his soul in order to prepare
      it for the greater experiences to come, and to realize the passions
      that would quicken this soul for the redemption.

      My inspirations come from efforts of intensified thinking in
      relationship to studying the works of Rudolf Steiner. I was compelled
      to start writing about it 11 years ago, and my recent posts on the
      evolutionary Christ and His reappearance are based on thinking into the
      matter. Also, I believe if one takes Steiner's gospel renderings in
      their totality, including the Fifth Gospel, that it is clearly
      indicated that Jesus retains his own soul throughout.

      Steve
    • dottie zold
      ... in ... Dr. Steiner states that teh Buddha stream and the Zarathusthra stream converge on the Nathan Jesus at twelve? And if he did, wouldn t it be in two
      Message 2 of 18 , Aug 3, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Stephen:
        > We know that the Buddha stream and the Zarathurstra stream converged
        in
        > the young boy at twelve, and he retained his soul in order to prepare
        > it for the greater experiences to come, and to realize the passions
        > that would quicken this soul for the redemption.

        Dr. Steiner states that teh Buddha stream and the Zarathusthra stream
        converge on the Nathan Jesus at twelve? And if he did, wouldn't it be
        in two completely different manners as the Zarathusthra soul came to
        live within the Nathan Jesus?

        I have not come to the same understanding as you have regarding this
        sister soul of Adam remaining in the body. But that could be because I
        have not contemplated this nor have been inspired about it. Rather, I
        have been inspired to understand that the soul of this Nathan Jesus
        left the body at the incoming of the Christ or just before. It seems to
        me that Dr. Steiner relates the body as being specifically on its own
        and living off the Zarathusthra forces. I mean he specifically states
        this but he never does state what happens to this Nathan soul.

        If you are correct in your inspirations than it would seem to me that
        the spirit of the Nathan soul is the spirit that is seen fleeing the
        scene at the Judas kiss. And then that could also possibly explain how
        it is that the being Anthroposophia is an invisible human being that
        walks amongst men. But that seems a bit to easy for me in a way. I am
        tending to contemplate that when Dr. STeiner speaks of the MarySophia
        being coming from the cosmos hence making the 'stepmother' a virgin,
        what we really are led to is the idea that the SophiaMary or what I am
        calling the sister soul of Adam leaves Jesus and enters into the step
        mother. Dr. STeiner is not explicit although he does say she comes from
        the spiritual worlds and not specifically from the Nathan Jesus.

        Are you open to the idea that you may be incorrect or are you sure of
        this understanding as to the soul remaining in the Nathan Jesus? I
        would like to present something from the Fifth Gospel, for you or for
        others who want to look at this, that speaks to the body being by
        itself. Maybe from there you can share how it is that it has come to
        your inspirations that this sister soul of Adam remains within the
        body. I have to say it does not feel correct to me but I am open minded
        to the possibility. It is a big point to consider and I think that is
        more important in fact than what happened to the body, and even more
        important that we get it right.

        Best,
        Dottie
      • Steve Hale
        ... converged ... prepare ... passions ... stream ... be ... to ... this ... because I ... Rather, I ... Jesus ... seems to ... own ... states ... that ... the
        Message 3 of 18 , Aug 3, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "dottie zold"
          <dottie_z@y...> wrote:
          > Stephen:
          > > We know that the Buddha stream and the Zarathurstra stream
          converged
          > in
          > > the young boy at twelve, and he retained his soul in order to
          prepare
          > > it for the greater experiences to come, and to realize the
          passions
          > > that would quicken this soul for the redemption.
          >
          > Dr. Steiner states that teh Buddha stream and the Zarathusthra
          stream
          > converge on the Nathan Jesus at twelve? And if he did, wouldn't it
          be
          > in two completely different manners as the Zarathusthra soul came
          to
          > live within the Nathan Jesus?
          >
          > I have not come to the same understanding as you have regarding
          this
          > sister soul of Adam remaining in the body. But that could be
          because I
          > have not contemplated this nor have been inspired about it.
          Rather, I
          > have been inspired to understand that the soul of this Nathan
          Jesus
          > left the body at the incoming of the Christ or just before. It
          seems to
          > me that Dr. Steiner relates the body as being specifically on its
          own
          > and living off the Zarathusthra forces. I mean he specifically
          states
          > this but he never does state what happens to this Nathan soul.
          >
          > If you are correct in your inspirations than it would seem to me
          that
          > the spirit of the Nathan soul is the spirit that is seen fleeing
          the
          > scene at the Judas kiss. And then that could also possibly explain
          how
          > it is that the being Anthroposophia is an invisible human being
          that
          > walks amongst men. But that seems a bit to easy for me in a way. I
          am
          > tending to contemplate that when Dr. STeiner speaks of the
          MarySophia
          > being coming from the cosmos hence making the 'stepmother' a
          virgin,
          > what we really are led to is the idea that the SophiaMary or what
          I am
          > calling the sister soul of Adam leaves Jesus and enters into the
          step
          > mother. Dr. STeiner is not explicit although he does say she comes
          from
          > the spiritual worlds and not specifically from the Nathan Jesus.
          >
          > Are you open to the idea that you may be incorrect or are you sure
          of
          > this understanding as to the soul remaining in the Nathan Jesus? I
          > would like to present something from the Fifth Gospel, for you or
          for
          > others who want to look at this, that speaks to the body being by
          > itself. Maybe from there you can share how it is that it has come
          to
          > your inspirations that this sister soul of Adam remains within the
          > body. I have to say it does not feel correct to me but I am open
          minded
          > to the possibility. It is a big point to consider and I think that
          is
          > more important in fact than what happened to the body, and even
          more
          > important that we get it right.
          >
          > Best,
          > Dottie

          Well, for an astral body and an etheric body to be at the head and
          foot of the empty grave, as perceived by Mary Magdalene, the soul is
          proven to have existed in the Nathan Jesus, correct? And when she
          sees the gardener who wakes her up, who's he?

          Steve
        • dottie zold
          Friends I just have to share this little piece from Dennis Klocek s book Knowledge, Teaching and teh Death of thy Mysteries: Adult Education: 2000 You take a
          Message 4 of 18 , Aug 3, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Friends I just have to share this little piece from
            Dennis Klocek's book Knowledge, Teaching and teh Death
            of thy Mysteries:

            Adult Education: 2000

            "You take a picture from teh natural world, you hold
            it and try to unfold it sequence to sequence. A
            picture will form in you as a process of becoming.
            When you do that, you have directly entered your
            etheric body, that is imagination. In the beginning it
            is an imagination with a little i. If it is taken as a
            practice - a regular, rhythmical practice - and again
            and again you form a leaf and try to see how the leaf
            would grow, growing it in your inner eye, that is
            meditation. It is an etheric meditation on the formal
            principle behind the leaf.

            If it is incorrect, and you keep persisting in the
            rhythm, it will be corrected. It will be corrected by
            the beings who stand behind those ether forces in the
            natural world. They will come to you because suddenly
            here is a human being who is showing an extraordinary
            interest in their activity. Just think how you would
            feel if you ahd been laboring your whole life to do
            something in obscurity, and suddenly some being poked
            his head through into the space where you were working
            and said, "Wow! That is really cool, what you are
            doing!" What would you do? You would turn to him and
            say, 'Hey! Where have you been all my life?" That is
            just what the beings who are serving the Christ Being
            and teh Hierarchies in nature will do when you start
            to pay attention to them in the way they need to be
            paid attention to, which is in a lawful way.

            Goethe called this practice 'exact sense perception'.
            It is a great tool for the Waldorf teachers. Take
            anything that you are struggling with in a block, in a
            science block especially, and just try to picture it.
            But don't picture it as a dead thing; picture it with
            a sensitivity towards how it looked just before it got
            to where it is now. Then take that a step back, and
            then a step back. If you can get two or three steps
            back, you are in your ether body. That is right from
            Rudolf Steiner'. You are in your ether body if you can
            begin to see this process inwardly in an exact way. It
            has to be exact - and there is a danger. The danger is
            that when you do that, and you start to actually see
            pictures, you will think: one, that you made them; and
            two, that they are correct. So we have to make that
            more rigorous.

            What we do is to go from the ether body into the
            astral body, because the astral body is where the
            action is. Taht is where the adversaries are building
            little fast food places where they hang out, waiting
            for lunch. WE need to find a way in there, and teh way
            we find in, which osunds paradoxical, is that 'after'
            we form the exact picture we have to think it away
            into complete and utter silence. When we think it away
            into complete utter silence, we have entered directly
            into our astral body, according to Rudolf Steiner.
            When we participate in the astral body, the danger is
            that in the astral body we hvae the experiencces that
            we have no form, because the form comes from the
            etheric pole."

            Dottie:

            This man is so amazing. Really. It's like reading
            Rudolf Steiner it is so simplistic yet so very deep
            and oh so very very funny. Dr. Steiner makes me laugh,
            he always has, and now so does Mr. Klocek. He has a
            great thought on how we 'turn the will' and a great
            ongoing conversation with the hiearchies asking 'why
            are they following those retarded beings with
            everything we give them?:))))) Oh God it is so
            wonderful to read a modern day man after the likes of
            Dr. Steiner. Truly it is.

            I think this is a great book for people who want to
            know what Dr. Steiner' teachings are about. I mean Mr.
            Klocek expresses Dr. Steiner's thoughts in such
            simplistic terms that I can hear Dr. Steiner saying
            'hey, why didn't I think to say it like that, thanks
            Dennis' :)) Really it is that good and simplified.
            Maybe I will share a part of his thoughts on the
            'turning of the will' tomorrow. It's pretty stunning
            and again simplistic.

            All good things,
            Dottie



            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            http://mail.yahoo.com
          • dottie zold
            ... is ... Pardon my thickness Stephen, I do not understand what you are saying here. Would you please rephrase it? As I understand the those standing at the
            Message 5 of 18 , Aug 3, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Stephen:
              > Well, for an astral body and an etheric body to be at the head and
              > foot of the empty grave, as perceived by Mary Magdalene, the soul
              is
              > proven to have existed in the Nathan Jesus, correct? And when she
              > sees the gardener who wakes her up, who's he?

              Pardon my thickness Stephen, I do not understand what you are saying
              here. Would you please rephrase it?

              As I understand the those standing at the foot are the
              representations of the Heavenly and Earthly Sophia tending the body.
              I never considered it to be the astral and etheric of Christ. Is that
              what you are getting at? Which would seem to possibly be one part of
              the sevenfold mystery of this picture. And, again, we would have to
              remember that it is not only at the death but also before the death
              that we have these pictures of the Magdalene at the feet and also
              annointing the head. But maybe I misunderstand you.

              As for 'who woke her up', Christ is to have said she was already one
              who could see the Light, and I take that as the Sophia. What 'woke'
              her up is actually the Word. She was the first to hear the 'Word'
              transformed, and that men could now hear it again as in the time of
              old. Well, truth be told I am flying on a wing and a prayer with that
              last comment. But it is a good question as to who or what woke her
              up. I'd say it was the transformed Word.

              All good things,

              Dottie
            • dottie zold
              ... Another thing occurs to me and that is that the Shekinah is at the physical existance of the Godhead or maybe a way to say it is the representation of God
              Message 6 of 18 , Aug 3, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                > As I understand the those standing at the foot are the
                > representations of the Heavenly and Earthly Sophia tending the body.
                > I never considered it to be the astral and etheric of Christ. Is that
                > what you are getting at? Which would seem to possibly be one part of
                > the sevenfold mystery of this picture. And, again, we would have to
                > remember that it is not only at the death but also before the death
                > that we have these pictures of the Magdalene at the feet and also
                > annointing the head. But maybe I misunderstand you.

                Another thing occurs to me and that is that the Shekinah is at the
                physical existance of the Godhead or maybe a way to say it is the
                representation of God manifested. In that She sits at the bottom, it is
                also through Her that the top is infused: it comes from the Earthly
                level to the Heavenly level as we are rising. So, it could be that the
                Magdalene is the very representation of this Shekinah and then again at
                the top of the head as well. At the top She becomes the 'virgin', so
                infused by the bottom. As we are in the earthly realm it might be
                correct to also look at it from that level. When we consider further
                that we have the Magdalene annointing not only the feet but also the
                head I do believe this gives an indication of her earthly capacity of
                representing the fishes (feet) to the scales (virgin). At least this
                seems to be where I have been heading for quite a few years. I guess
                the language is now getting a bit clearer for me.

                Thanks Stephen, for the conversation which leads to further study for
                me.
                Dottie
              • Steve Hale
                ... and ... soul ... she ... saying ... body. ... that ... of ... to ... death ... one ... What woke ... of ... that ... Steiner gave an excellent single
                Message 7 of 18 , Aug 4, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "dottie zold"
                  <dottie_z@y...> wrote:
                  > Stephen:
                  > > Well, for an astral body and an etheric body to be at the head
                  and
                  > > foot of the empty grave, as perceived by Mary Magdalene, the
                  soul
                  > is
                  > > proven to have existed in the Nathan Jesus, correct? And when
                  she
                  > > sees the gardener who wakes her up, who's he?
                  >
                  > Pardon my thickness Stephen, I do not understand what you are
                  saying
                  > here. Would you please rephrase it?
                  >
                  > As I understand the those standing at the foot are the
                  > representations of the Heavenly and Earthly Sophia tending the
                  body.
                  > I never considered it to be the astral and etheric of Christ. Is
                  that
                  > what you are getting at? Which would seem to possibly be one part
                  of
                  > the sevenfold mystery of this picture. And, again, we would have
                  to
                  > remember that it is not only at the death but also before the
                  death
                  > that we have these pictures of the Magdalene at the feet and also
                  > annointing the head. But maybe I misunderstand you.
                  >
                  > As for 'who woke her up', Christ is to have said she was already
                  one
                  > who could see the Light, and I take that as the Sophia.
                  What 'woke'
                  > her up is actually the Word. She was the first to hear the 'Word'
                  > transformed, and that men could now hear it again as in the time
                  of
                  > old. Well, truth be told I am flying on a wing and a prayer with
                  that
                  > last comment. But it is a good question as to who or what woke her
                  > up. I'd say it was the transformed Word.
                  >
                  > All good things,
                  >
                  > Dottie

                  Steiner gave an excellent single lecture entitled: Jesus and Christ,
                  on Oct. 4, 1911, just before the major lecture course, "From Jesus
                  To Christ", at Karslruhe from Oct. 5-14, 1911. And in this single
                  lecture he expresses the important fact that when the Buddha and
                  Zarathustra Streams converge in Jesus at the age of twelve, that the
                  two mystery streams of the ancients also converged therein. One was
                  an etheric path wherein the neophyte was taken into his inner self
                  in order to find the God man, and the other took the student out of
                  his body for an astral communion with the macrocosm, and the
                  experience of "that thou art". Thus, the one path was the path of
                  the microcosm and the other the path of the macrocosm. Both led to
                  the experience of Universal Human. And the disciple took on his
                  white garment; his nainsook to use a fine biblical term for it. And
                  as a result of his initiation, he knew he bore an immortal soul, as
                  his past lives were now there within this fine white garment that he
                  now consciously possessed. And he became a warrior of the fourth
                  stage of initiation.

                  When Mary Magdalene sees two Angels at the foot and head of the
                  empty tomb, she asks: "Where have they taken him"? And then, in
                  seeing the gardener while weeping, a voice coming from the gardener
                  says: "Mary!" And only then does she know Who the gardener is; The
                  Risen Christ. Now, this is all covered quite well in Steiner's
                  lectures on the Gospel of St. John, and the explanation of who the
                  two Angels are, i.e., the etheric and astral bodies of Jesus having
                  vacated the physical corpse. The Gospel of Mark lectures even say
                  that the two Mary's see the young man from the night before, wearing
                  the fine linen garment that had fallen to the ground when Jesus was
                  taken into custody, but herein no reference is made to a gardener.
                  And only the Luke gospel refers to the young man of Nain, which
                  Steiner describes in his lecture cycle on the Gospel of Luke as
                  being the Linga Sharira of the Matthew Jesus. And the Gospel of
                  Matthew lectures make a profound imapct in emphasizing the two great
                  streams flowing down out of the Godhead; the stream of 77
                  generations to Joseph, and the stream of 42 generations to Joseph.
                  And how the Hebrews are the chosen ones to prepare the physical
                  hereditary bloodline for the incarnation of Zarathustra Himself into
                  the boy born in a house in Bethlehem.

                  Now, these two streams were originally vested in the first two
                  students of Zarathustra; the one student being of contemporaneous
                  space, and the other student being the student of uncreated time.
                  Then, uncreated time got broken into creation, and the 42
                  generations of Abraham commenced the specific downward tendency to
                  the Matthew Jesus, while the spatial stream remained unabated. So,
                  of necessity, the time stream and the space streams had to flow
                  together for the future evolution of mankind. The Fifth Gospel is
                  the supersensible gospel, known to the Hebrew priests even before
                  the Gospel of Matthew was written, and restored two thousand years
                  later by Rudolf Steiner. It fills in what the others can't discern,
                  and gives us a fuller christology than has ever been known.

                  Steve
                • gaelman58
                  ... should ... have. ... home, ... the ... Had an experience years ago...encountered a beautiful woman who, after I did a specific thing, directed my attention
                  Message 8 of 18 , Aug 4, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "dottie zold"
                    <dottie_z@y...> wrote:
                    > Gaelman:
                    > > I was struck by your mention of the "visitation" by Miss
                    > Magdalene.
                    > > With experiences like that it seems to me that one should get
                    > > immediately "practical" and grounded.
                    >
                    > You know what's interesting Gaelman? People thinking what it
                    should
                    > mean or should happen once a person experiences somethings as I
                    have.
                    > I have seen the Christ in my room, and once in a box guiding me
                    home,
                    > I have seen his form in the clouds as well as that of Michael and
                    > know they were for me to specifically see. But the only one who
                    > appeared as a physical moving exsistance as in a bodily force was
                    the
                    > Magdalene.

                    Had an experience years ago...encountered a beautiful woman who,
                    after I did a specific thing, directed my attention to a symbol
                    representing a principle...that experience is clear in my memory
                    whenever I summon it...almost photographic...but I really don't know
                    who the woman was or why she reminded me of the "principle"...I
                    don't know what simply arose out of me or what might have been
                    objective reality...so I'm not concluding anything...but I can
                    describe her countenance and color and "fashion" of her "garb".
                    >
                    > Now, I never gave it any thought as to what that means or even
                    that
                    > there was a difference in my experience of these Beings. But with
                    > your question it ocurrs to me that it was the Magdalene that I was
                    > clearly able to experience as a seeing and a real physical
                    existance.
                    > The others were for me to 'believe' in the possibilities, or even
                    > maybe a 'shoring up' a bit for what is in store for me. Like a
                    little
                    > bit at a time so as not to overwhelm me.
                    >
                    > But the Magdalene came straight at me in physical movement and
                    from
                    > above me. Almost as if one could close ones eyes and feel or even
                    see
                    > a sparkly energetic thingy moving at you. And you would open your
                    > eyes and truly what you thought was coming at you unseen was
                    actually
                    > truly coming at you. And she came with a thinking possibility,
                    like a
                    > real possibility to interact with one on one. Like, right there in
                    > your face. I never wondered what she thought about me 'batting'
                    her
                    > away. I did a few weeks back think on this but never before. I
                    > actually try not to imagine if she understood that I thought she
                    was
                    > saying she was truly me in the sense that I was that incarnation.
                    I
                    > didn't understand that she was showing me to myself as she will
                    show
                    > others to themselves. Now I understand.

                    Not for me to muck about with other folk's experiences...but with
                    regard to the Magdalene I don't think I be forgetting that she's a
                    human being...and would observe the amenities...that is, she
                    wouldn't come unless summoned...whereas those other deceiving
                    buggers would show up as they determined and would probably put on a
                    hell of a light show for purposes of impression...and she'd probably
                    have something to say to another human being which would be exactly
                    germane to the business at hand.
                    >
                    > But I want to say there is a very grave misundertanding as to who
                    can
                    > see her and also the Christ and what that must mean for their
                    moral
                    > lives and such. It is not as others say. It really is a weeping
                    > heart that calls them forth. My heart weeps in a sense for wanting
                    to
                    > serve. It always has and I imagine it always will. I am not
                    perfect
                    > as can be seen by this list however I do have such a perfect
                    heart. I
                    > do so love everyone. And I do so stand at the service of the
                    Queen.
                    > And I think that my deep desire, which must come from the
                    beginning
                    > of time, is what calls them to me

                    What you say here is essentially what Steiner says in the
                    Lecture, "The Mission of Reverence", 28 Oct 1909...."The
                    Consciousness Soul will never gain a knowledge of external objects
                    unless love and devotion inspire its quest; otherwise the objects
                    will not be truly observed."




                    It's not that I have acheived
                    > Consciousness Soul or Spirit Self, or have attained the three
                    > whatever it was that Terence spoke on, it is none of that. It is
                    my
                    > pure desire to serve and to grow to learn how to better serve.
                    >
                    > So, I may not seem practical but I am very. I may not seem
                    > intellectual but I am very. I may not seem balanced but I am very.
                    > And the reason is because the grace that has been bestowed upon me
                    to
                    > experience the Christ and the Magdalene and the Sophia and the
                    > Michael have pulled me to the center of my core. And I still make
                    > great mistakes. But I do try so very very hard. And that is what I
                    > think it takes: a trying, weeping, swashbuckling, sailor swearing
                    > heart that is very meek within.
                    >
                    > Doesn't your heart weep Gaelman? I sense that it does.

                    But Dottie, Oi'm an Oirishman...what would ye expect?...Katy Feeny
                    sings a song, "The Most of All", Mother Mary singing to her infant
                    son knowing full well what's in store for Him...I can't listen to it
                    without weeping.


                    >
                    > And I will tell you a secret: I don't tell these things to make
                    > myself look good: if anything it makes me look unbalanced,
                    boastful,
                    > and I catch a lot of slack for just suggesting it. But I do it for
                    > Them. They want people to know that They are about. And I am fine
                    > with that.

                    Ride light in the saddle and laugh at solemnity,eh?...regards,
                    Gaelman
                    >
                    > All good things,
                    > Dottie
                  • adm_anthroposophia
                    Queen of Red. King of White. Unite! Turn the Universe into Pink. Xandor ... have. ... home, ... the ... existance. ... little ... see ... actually ... a ...
                    Message 9 of 18 , Aug 4, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Queen of Red. King of White. Unite! Turn the Universe into Pink.

                      Xandor




                      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "dottie zold"
                      <dottie_z@y...> wrote:
                      > Gaelman:
                      > > I was struck by your mention of the "visitation" by Miss
                      > Magdalene.
                      > > With experiences like that it seems to me that one should get
                      > > immediately "practical" and grounded.
                      >
                      > You know what's interesting Gaelman? People thinking what it should
                      > mean or should happen once a person experiences somethings as I
                      have.
                      > I have seen the Christ in my room, and once in a box guiding me
                      home,
                      > I have seen his form in the clouds as well as that of Michael and
                      > know they were for me to specifically see. But the only one who
                      > appeared as a physical moving exsistance as in a bodily force was
                      the
                      > Magdalene.
                      >
                      > Now, I never gave it any thought as to what that means or even that
                      > there was a difference in my experience of these Beings. But with
                      > your question it ocurrs to me that it was the Magdalene that I was
                      > clearly able to experience as a seeing and a real physical
                      existance.
                      > The others were for me to 'believe' in the possibilities, or even
                      > maybe a 'shoring up' a bit for what is in store for me. Like a
                      little
                      > bit at a time so as not to overwhelm me.
                      >
                      > But the Magdalene came straight at me in physical movement and from
                      > above me. Almost as if one could close ones eyes and feel or even
                      see
                      > a sparkly energetic thingy moving at you. And you would open your
                      > eyes and truly what you thought was coming at you unseen was
                      actually
                      > truly coming at you. And she came with a thinking possibility, like
                      a
                      > real possibility to interact with one on one. Like, right there in
                      > your face. I never wondered what she thought about me 'batting' her
                      > away. I did a few weeks back think on this but never before. I
                      > actually try not to imagine if she understood that I thought she
                      was
                      > saying she was truly me in the sense that I was that incarnation. I
                      > didn't understand that she was showing me to myself as she will
                      show
                      > others to themselves. Now I understand.
                      >
                      > But I want to say there is a very grave misundertanding as to who
                      can
                      > see her and also the Christ and what that must mean for their moral
                      > lives and such. It is not as others say. It really is a weeping
                      > heart that calls them forth. My heart weeps in a sense for wanting
                      to
                      > serve. It always has and I imagine it always will. I am not perfect
                      > as can be seen by this list however I do have such a perfect heart.
                      I
                      > do so love everyone. And I do so stand at the service of the Queen.
                      > And I think that my deep desire, which must come from the beginning
                      > of time, is what calls them to me. It's not that I have acheived
                      > Consciousness Soul or Spirit Self, or have attained the three
                      > whatever it was that Terence spoke on, it is none of that. It is my
                      > pure desire to serve and to grow to learn how to better serve.
                      >
                      > So, I may not seem practical but I am very. I may not seem
                      > intellectual but I am very. I may not seem balanced but I am very.
                      > And the reason is because the grace that has been bestowed upon me
                      to
                      > experience the Christ and the Magdalene and the Sophia and the
                      > Michael have pulled me to the center of my core. And I still make
                      > great mistakes. But I do try so very very hard. And that is what I
                      > think it takes: a trying, weeping, swashbuckling, sailor swearing
                      > heart that is very meek within.
                      >
                      > Doesn't your heart weep Gaelman? I sense that it does.
                      >
                      > And I will tell you a secret: I don't tell these things to make
                      > myself look good: if anything it makes me look unbalanced,
                      boastful,
                      > and I catch a lot of slack for just suggesting it. But I do it for
                      > Them. They want people to know that They are about. And I am fine
                      > with that.
                      >
                      > All good things,
                      > Dottie
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.