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

Dixon's Farm (was: Christ and the Maya Calendar)

Expand Messages
  • elfuncle
    ... Wow, it s an exact match for 1972, when Jean Dixon was actually 68 (born in 1904) and said she was 54 (born in 1918), and prophetic Bob Dylan wrote it a
    Message 1 of 11 , Apr 7, 2009
      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "elfuncle" <coolvibes@...> wrote:

      > It had commonly been reported that Dixon was born January 3, 1918;
      > however, per the Social Security Death Index her actual birthdate was
      > January 5, 1904.
      >
      > And Bob Dylan said:
      >
      > She's sixty-eight but she says she's fifty-four....
      >
      > And I said:
      >
      > Ain't gonna believe in Dixon's bullshit no more.....


      Wow, it's an exact match for 1972, when Jean Dixon was actually 68 (born in 1904) and said she was 54 (born in 1918), and prophetic Bob Dylan wrote it a decade earlier, ans now we realize that Jeane Dixon was indeed Maggie's Ma:

      I ain't gonna work for Maggie's ma no more.
      No, I ain't gonna work for Maggie's ma no more.
      Well, she talks to all the servants
      About man and God and law.
      Everybody says
      She's the brains behind pa.
      She's sixty-eight, but she says she's fifty-four.
      I ain't gonna work for Maggie's ma no more.
      Later on he played around with that age-line and changed it back and forth, but here's the absolute original:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVhCmG9beCs

      Dixon and her cohorts would probably want to add this:

      Have you heard? It's in the stars
      Next July we collide with Mars.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kq1JQUhwVQ 

      Tarjei


    • Kim
      ... could be ... nur ... die ... da, wo wir ... erkennen, ... òberall da ... The real problem here is lack of Common Sense and Courage to follow it even if
      Message 2 of 11 , Apr 8, 2009
        > 12.Conclusion.
        >
        > I have tried to understand why this different/controverse opinions could be
        > (t)here.
        >
        > In GA 254, 19-10-1915 Steiner describes:"Ahriman und Luzifer kØnnen nur
        > etwas machen, wenn ein Widerspruch unbemerkt bleibt, wenn wir nicht die
        > kraft und den Willen haben, den Widerspruch aufzudecken. ¥berall da, wo wir
        > uns in einen Widerspruch verwickeln, den wir nicht als Widerspruch erkennen,
        > sondern einfach gelten lassen als einen lebenswahren Inhalt, òberall da
        > haben Luzifer und Ahriman die MØglichkeit, sich unserer Seele zu
        > bem¬chtigen."

        The real problem here is lack of Common Sense and Courage to follow it even if the rest of the world follows the hype and the pseudo intellectual rubbish.

        > Behind this all could be perhaps following:
        >
        > The hope that Christ comes into this world and makes a new paradyse of this
        > fysical , staying material world not according and confirm the freedom of
        > becoming mankind going to the new Jeruzalem (Jupiter) as a spiritualized new
        > world, being not fysical anymore.
        This is the Ahrimanian trap, keeping man and the intellect in the physical world. Meeting Christ in the Etheric World is the New Jerusalem. When we meet Christ in the Etheric we take our intellect with us out of the physical world were Ahriman wants to trap it, likewise when we meet Christ in the Etheric we leave the bonds of Karma.

        Remember the last words of Christ to Peter about John? When we die, we lose our etheric body, and we are then born again building a new etherbody, following our Karma. But when we meet Christ in the Etheric we have refined our Etheric body so much that we dont loose it, we take our intellect with us, and leave Karma behind us as we meet Christ in the New Jerusalem. We we are born again we remember, as John.

        Kim Graae Munch

      • Robert Mason
        ... [snip] ... [snip] ... Robert writes: Kees, I appreciate the work that you have done to apply some critical thinking to the work of Robert Powell; there s
        Message 3 of 11 , Apr 9, 2009
          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Kees hotmail" <K_Kromme@...> wrote:
          [snip]
          > As I wrote before, much more is to say about/against this Powell book. Every
          > human makes mistakes. Thats no problem at all. When clean Michaelic thoughts
          > can help us to overcome mistakes, we must be glad. But what if man will stay
          > by the "Widersprüche" (contradictions)? What is an enemy of anthroposophy?
          > Are the counterforces not in each of us?
          [snip]
          > Thus far only Lutz and Kees were reakting to each other. Are there readers
          > of this discussion who want to investigate in the discussion too? You are
          > welcome! If above is described "the biggest secret of our time", why then
          > not participating in its revelation, even on the medium internet?

          Robert writes:

          Kees, I appreciate the work that you have done
          to apply some critical thinking to the work of
          Robert Powell; there's been far too little of
          any real *thinking* on this subject, as far as
          I have seen. I don't know why Powell is allowed
          such a free run in Anthro circles, especially
          since Proky's and Lazarides' book many years
          ago should have put Anthros on notice. I did
          make a small effort in this direction recently
          <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/message/38147>
          -- in this post I did mention the exchange
          between you and Lutz. I did benefit from that,
          but I didn't understand it all; I read German
          very poorly. And I don't have any of Powell's
          books now.

          In the same vein: IMO Proky himself gets far
          too much of a free run from Anthros; the most
          notable exception being the book by the late
          Irina Gordienko
          <http://lochmann-verlag.com/gordienko%20info%20a.htm>
          -- but that's ten years old now. It seems not
          to have been taken seriously enough; Proky is
          on the Vorstand now, still publishing big books
          and lecturing all over the place under the
          auspices of the Dornach Society. I've read
          some of his books years ago (and far too
          uncritically) but now I have only his recent
          little book on Tomberg and a few chapters
          from his first Tomberg book.

          Maybe Ben Aharon gets too much of a free run
          also? I don't know; I read a couple of his
          books many years ago (again, far too
          uncritically), but I haven't studied him even
          as closely as I have Powell and Proky -- and
          even that's not very much.

          And now I'm getting very little time online,
          so I'm not in a position to carry on much
          of an investigative discussion here and now.
          But I do *very* much agree that we need to
          look out for *contradictions*, even, and
          especially, in the writings published by
          the Anthro presses. As STEINER SAID,
          Lucifer and Ahriman enter us when we tolerate
          contradictions in our thinking.

          Robert Mason
        • Cheese Curve
          Robert thanks you for the reply! interessting fact is that my comments on Powell are sent by Lutz (long ago) to Powell and he used this comments to repair
          Message 4 of 11 , Apr 10, 2009
            Robert thanks you for the reply!
            interessting fact is that my comments on Powell
            are sent by Lutz (long ago) to Powell and he used this comments to "repair" the described book in the new outcoming since then,
            so many of the errors will probably not be found in the later outcoming title, or no more so clear disposed
             
            I dont know if I have to be so very happy with this fact(;-)
             
            thanks for your links beyond, I am going to read them soon
             
            greetz Kees
             

            To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
            From: robertsmason_99@...
            Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 18:18:22 +0000
            Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Christ and the Maya Calendar the case Robert Powell



            --- In anthroposophy_ tomorrow@ yahoogroups. com, "Kees hotmail" <K_Kromme@.. .> wrote:
            [snip]
            > As I wrote before, much more is to say about/against this Powell book. Every
            > human makes mistakes. Thats no problem at all. When clean Michaelic thoughts
            > can help us to overcome mistakes, we must be glad. But what if man will stay
            > by the "Widersprüche" (contradictions) ? What is an enemy of anthroposophy?
            > Are the counterforces not in each of us?
            [snip]
            > Thus far only Lutz and Kees were reakting to each other. Are there readers
            > of this discussion who want to investigate in the discussion too? You are
            > welcome! If above is described "the biggest secret of our time", why then
            > not participating in its revelation, even on the medium internet?

            Robert writes:

            Kees, I appreciate the work that you have done
            to apply some critical thinking to the work of
            Robert Powell; there's been far too little of
            any real *thinking* on this subject, as far as
            I have seen. I don't know why Powell is allowed
            such a free run in Anthro circles, especially
            since Proky's and Lazarides' book many years
            ago should have put Anthros on notice. I did
            make a small effort in this direction recently
            <http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/anthroposo phy_tomorrow/ message/38147>
            -- in this post I did mention the exchange
            between you and Lutz. I did benefit from that,
            but I didn't understand it all; I read German
            very poorly. And I don't have any of Powell's
            books now.

            In the same vein: IMO Proky himself gets far
            too much of a free run from Anthros; the most
            notable exception being the book by the late
            Irina Gordienko
            <http://lochmann- verlag.com/ gordienko% 20info%20a. htm>
            -- but that's ten years old now. It seems not
            to have been taken seriously enough; Proky is
            on the Vorstand now, still publishing big books
            and lecturing all over the place under the
            auspices of the Dornach Society. I've read
            some of his books years ago (and far too
            uncritically) but now I have only his recent
            little book on Tomberg and a few chapters
            from his first Tomberg book.

            Maybe Ben Aharon gets too much of a free run
            also? I don't know; I read a couple of his
            books many years ago (again, far too
            uncritically) , but I haven't studied him even
            as closely as I have Powell and Proky -- and
            even that's not very much.

            And now I'm getting very little time online,
            so I'm not in a position to carry on much
            of an investigative discussion here and now.
            But I do *very* much agree that we need to
            look out for *contradictions* , even, and
            especially, in the writings published by
            the Anthro presses. As STEINER SAID,
            Lucifer and Ahriman enter us when we tolerate
            contradictions in our thinking.

            Robert Mason




            Alle tips en trics. Ontdek nu de nieuwe Windows Live
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.