The Source Field Investigations Video Discussion Thread

[MarkM]

we are all individual cells of the body of the creator... although we change frequently and are constantly reborn... the essence remains that we are all but fractions of a whole! and only when we stand together and understand the importance of both singularity and multiplicity will we reunite to be able to think on the collective level... thus being the sparks of white light that we are we will eventually reach the final wall, and bounce back into the origin!

love,
ra ma

nice explanation, liz...

i feel that rather than being a cell in the body, so to speak, we are the whole body. i like to think of a holographic photo-plate - if you break it up into many fragments, each fragment does not contain a fragment of the original holographic image, it holds the entire image in totality and with full resolution. to me, this speaks to the essence!

this helps me understand that every being is precious beyond measure, as this indicates to me that there is really only one being.

seeing another person is like seeing myself in an old video - that's me in another time and place, doing different things... not a separate person. i might wince at watching my youthful folly on film, but accept and forgive that youngster, as he grew to be me as i am today, here and now. i think that beyond the distortions of this place, we are all animated by the same full and undivided infinite creator, all of us being of the same real identity at heart, only separated by what we are doing in our respective here and now scenarios. mark

[billybobbutterball]

nice explanation, liz...

i feel that rather than being a cell in the body, so to speak, we are the whole body. i like to think of a holographic photo-plate - if you break it up into many fragments, each fragment does not contain a fragment of the original holographic image, it holds the entire image in totality and with full resolution. to me, this speaks to the essence!

this helps me understand that every being is precious beyond measure, as this indicates to me that there is really only one being.

seeing another person is like seeing myself in an old video - that's me in another time and place, doing different things... not a separate person. i might wince at watching my youthful folly on film, but accept and forgive that youngster, as he grew to be me as i am today, here and now. i think that beyond the distortions of this place, we are all animated by the same full and undivided infinite creator, all of us being of the same real identity at heart, only separated by what we are doing in our respective here and now scenarios. mark

i certainly agree with mark. but as he pointed out he is obviously a younger version of myself so understandably lacks the comprehension of certain subtleties that come with age. (sorry! couldn't resist that opening..just kidding) a thought that i found helpful to me goes something like this: "the cosmic plan is that understanding/wisdom comes from the experiences of diversity within unity."

so the idea of separation is only apparent, not real. billybob

[Jeia Ra Manuk]

mark and bill,

well i was just being analytic. i think if we are going to use this analogy and look at things from a biological point of view... then we are not only one body... but all of us came out of one single cell...
i always had a problem with the darwinian model (way from the past ), although i have no problem, but only respect, for charles, because if it wasn't for his hard work we would not have such a rich fossil collection (not to mention a change in creation philosophy of the western modern world). my problem, as many other scientists and amateurs point out, is all the missing links of evolution... for me, the fact that cell division transformed to cell fertilization for evolutionary and survivor benefits, does not explain when and how exactly the switch occurred. we all began as one cell dividing into two, and so on... then the switch... and from then it was two cells that create new life... obviously not far all creatures... but we are focusing on humans. so it is rather backwards... and it is our kids that contain both parents within the singular being... this is why i always say that one can always make two and two can always make one...
thus the solution/resolution is that using such analogies is rather pointless if we don't know how we really got here
the past is both, behind and ahead of us... we observe the furthest regions of the universe as they were billions of years ago, yet here on earth we are not able to observe the past in such a matter...
this is why i keep pushing forward the idea of "the ripple effect." if we would be going from 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and then again 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, then we would be following a linear pattern... when obviously it all happens in a contraction/expansion matter, and thus the ripple effect and thus the water like attributes that the source field/force contains.

ha, sorry boys, i went on

love and light,
liz

[Jeia Ra Manuk]

ps: it's the return to oneness, and not a linear journey of separate being wanting to become one being... that's why i said: being the sparks of white light that we are we will eventually reach the final wall, and bounce back into the origin.

the final wall being the 4th density! and then back we go! expansion/contraction!

o my god, i'd like my nobel prize now, please!

[billybobbutterball]

dear eliz

concerning a remark you made in an earlier post that needs to be set straight... note: mark and i are not mere "boy's" we un's are "guys!" a little respect where it is due! is that too much to ask?

ok, that being settled, i came away with some little nudges that i would apply here and there to your description of life, darwin, etc. et all.

first, it seems important to me to keep in mind that "we" are not 2nd density bodies with a soul...we are immortal souls borrowing a temp. bod construction.(albeit, most often suffering a "hangover" from the experiences)

second point. human bodies have been bio-engineered by intelligent sub-logi.

third, darwinian evolution processes do have an interesting role, but i suspect it is largely secondary. (i can picture some sub-logi bio expert peeps having a lot of fun working together in adding modifications to their assigned bestiaries ...think of the challenge in designing a new and more formidable tyrannosaurus rex to handle your rival's super-enlarged big-hunk brontosaurus!

fourth; addressing the missing links...explainable by the wiping out of the old and introducing updates via the cyclic cosmic dna-info-infusing cosmic radiation principle that david is so excited about? seems a possible scenario?

and most importantly the fifth factor! whoops! phone ringing. gotta go!

billiebobbiebutter.......ahhh yours sincerely, billybobbutterballguy

love, bill

[Jeia Ra Manuk]

first of all bill, what's the difference between guys and boys? i might not be aware due to cultural differences.

second of all alright, but that model is suggesting mass extinction... well if they were devoured by those that are stronger wouldn't we still be pushing off of the darwinian model?

what about the plan? the design of the logos...
if we follow what ra says we should be believing in spontaneous evolution. because there is much variety of species on the second density including all the plant species and only one species on on the 3rd density that are native to earth. and if we have this form for 75,000 years then we are surely not from africa and we are surely not 200,000 years old... i mean our bodies were... but that doesn't mean the mind was active!

love and light,
one very tired liz

no invention is unique it is always a part of a failure of another!

[billybobbutterball]

gotta write something outside the quoted text to qualify the post...but wanted to put my learned response next to liz's comments...okay, that should do it...

first of all bill, what's the difference between guys and boys? i might not be aware due to cultural differences.

## liz...there is in fact a world-wide recognized difference -- there is by several orders of magnitude a difference between mommy's boy and that of a tough-talking, hairy-armed, biceps-flexing, testosterone fueled, "guy"

second of all alright, but that model is suggesting mass extinction... well if they were devoured by those that are stronger wouldn't we still be pushing off of the darwinian model?

## well, what's wrong with "mass extinction"? (oh...) darwin stuff figures in and is an undeniable feature of the upward onward march.

what about the plan? the design of the logos...
if we follow what ra says we should be believing in spontaneous evolution. because there is much variety of species on the second density including all the plant species and only one species on on the 3rd density that are native to earth. and if we have this form for 75,000 years then we are surely not from africa and we are surely not 200,000 years old... i mean our bodies were... but that doesn't mean the mind was active!

##the entire cosmos is conscious,intelligent/aware...so exactly what specific quality does the term "spontaneous" imply? something out of nothing? the meaning varies according to one's world view. and i don't buy that actually occurring even in quantum mechanics. as i understand it the soul is introduced into the vessel --not vise versa...the body does have an indwelling 2nd density factor that must be blended in...and which sometimes can over-influence the incoming soul-stuff -- which can result in a very "sour" life experience. many examples of this imbalance found in the works of michael newton (destiny of souls) and dolores cannon (4 vl convoluted universe)

## i'm seriously confused by much of this heady stuff. i'm not even sure of what i wrote so confident-ally above....especially about that "guy" stuff nonsense. ; ) best, billybob

love and light,
one very tired liz

no invention is unique it is always a part of a failure of another!

[Jeia Ra Manuk]

## liz...there is in fact a world-wide recognized difference -- there is by several orders of magnitude a difference between mommy's boy and that of a tough-talking, hairy-armed, biceps-flexing, testosterone fueled, "guy"

well what if for me, the word 'boys' means not mommy's boy but a grown man who is still keeping his inner child well and alive?

## well, what's wrong with "mass extinction"? (oh...) darwin stuff figures in and is an undeniable feature of the upward onward march.

there is nothing wrong with mass extinction and we obviously develop ideas from ideas that came before us... it's just the model you provided does not work on all levels... there is a depth to this... i can go into details... but you know me and details!

the entire cosmos is conscious,intelligent/aware...so exactly what specific quality does the term "spontaneous" imply? something out of nothing? the meaning varies according to one's world view. and i don't buy that actually occurring even in quantum mechanics. as i understand it the soul is introduced into the vessel --not vise versa...the body does have an indwelling 2nd density factor that must be blended in...and which sometimes can over-influence the incoming soul-stuff -- which can result in a very "sour" life experience. many examples of this imbalance found in the works of michael newton (destiny of souls) and dolores cannon (4 vl convoluted universe)

well that's exactly what i was pointing to... body first then mind... first is spirit of course, then body and then the mind... so first the spark of creation that will be unchangeable through out our whole experience, then the body and then the awakening of the mind! then we loose the body when we are done learning through it! and back and forth we go!

## i'm seriously confused by much of this heady stuff. i'm not even sure of what i wrote so confident-ally above....especially about that "guy" stuff nonsense. ; ) best, billybob

blah blah blah, i know you you're just saying that to hear me say: "o no bill, everything you say makes perfect sense and you are so smart and handsome and wonderful."

*runs away giggling*

love,
liz

[scottki]

concerning a remark you made in an earlier post that needs to be set straight... note: mark and i are not mere "boy's" we un's are "guys!" a little respect where it is due! is that too much to ask?

funny. rugby players, not those ponses who wear pads and helmets :d , call themselves rugby boys! i know you are pulling our leg though billybob. humour is the best remedy for life is it not?

[Jeia Ra Manuk]

scott and all,
well of course, but laughter also gives you wrinkles! lol!