It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The First Evolved Human of our Time (The Stargate Child)

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   
I’m expecting droves of abuse and argumentative opinions but none the less I will state my case as I see it...

The coming of the one is at hand. Prophets, Scribes, Shamans, Alchemists, Visionaries, Angelic hosts, Men of God, Spiritual humans, Religious scholars, New agers, Church, Temple, Mosque and Shrine members or all aware to some degree or other regarding the coming of the one. As far back as we can see in to human civilisation man has been fascinated with the "Avatar of the Age". Take a look at Ancient Mayan Culture and learn about Quetzalcoatl the God who is supposedly to reappear near the end of our age. Take a look at Christianity and the duality of it's prophecies concerning the reappearance of Christ and the appearance of the Antichrist. Take a look at Hinduism and learn about the Kalki Avatar who is to appear at the end of the age. Educate yourself on The Hadiths that accompany the Quran and learn about the Imam Mahdi who is to appear and do battle with the "One eyed Dajall" at the end of time. Take a look at Buddhism and The New Age Movement and see comparisons between Buddha Maitreya or the 5th Buddha spoken of by Buddha himself in canonical literature who was said to come at the end of the age. Look at the Torah and Zohar and the long list of qualities attributed to the Messiah the Jews have prophesised is yet to come. I'm sure you get the point!

Well this thread is all about "The One" (Another name attributed to the coming world teacher)
Let's assume everyone has heard of the blockbuster trilogy "The Matrix"

Many people have claimed The Matrix was a movie to condition the masses to accept the ideology of a Messiah so just to wet your taste buds here is how The Matrix refers to "The One"..

"Morpheus believes he is The One"

"You are The One, Neo. You see, you may have spent the last few years of your life looking for me, but I've spent my entire life looking for you"

"That I would find The One"

"So what do you think, do you think you're the One?"

"I'm going to let you in on a little secret...Being the One is just like being in love. No one can tell you you're in love, you just know it. Through and through. Balls to bones"

"I'm not The One"

"If Morpheus was right, then there's no way I can pull this plug. I mean, if Neo's The One, then there'd have to be some kinda miracle to stop me"

"'I'm not the one, Trinity. The Oracle hit me with that too"

"I knew it! He's the one"

"Neo..I'm not afraid anymore! The Oracle told me I would fall in love, and that man, the man that I loved, would be The One"

Another blockbuster movie that many believe was a more subtle Messiah preparation/conditioning movie was "Avatar"

A film which shows a race of beings that are in spiritual balance with their world until humans try to pillage their world and consequentially among the human race "A Saviour" is found.

We could also look at the movie "Avatar The Last Air bender" but we won't..

Instead here is a quote from an late Indian mystic and spiritual master known as Meher Baba..

"I am the Avatar of this Age! You know that you are a human being, and I know that I am the Avatar. It is my whole life! Irrespective of doubts and convictions, and for the Infinite Love I bear for one and all, I continue to come as the Avatar, to be judged time and again by humanity in its ignorance, in order to help man distinguish the Real from the false."

I guess the point i am trying to make through these self evident connections is that there are many people alive today that believe in such a being whether or not you chose to turn a blind eye, pass opinion or judgement or attack with a torrent of abuse. The fact remains that there are those who work and live life on a spiritual level that are awaiting "The One"

Let's now take a look at this figure from a more "Political" point of view...

To begin with let's open with a some what little known fact regarding the European Parliament..

The Tower Building (named after the Tower of Babel) houses the Fifth Parliament of Europe. It is certainly a building of the Space Age. The seats are designed like the crew seats in the Star Trek space machines. The legislative amphitheatre is arranged in a massive hemicircle and has 679 seats, each assigned to a particular lawmaker. For example, Seat 663 is assigned to Rep Souchet, 664 to Thomas-Mauro, 665 to Zizzner and 667 to Rep Cappato.

While these seats are allocated to Members, one seat remains unallocated and unoccupied. The number of that seat is 666. The relevant section of the seating-plan provided to each Member reads as follows:

660 Marchiani
661 Montfort
662 Quiero
663 Souchet
664 Thomas-Mauro
665 Zizzner
666 -------
667 Cappato
668 Turco
669 Bonino
670 Pannella
671 Dupuis
672 Della Vedova

Maybe just a coincidence right?

If we take a look at the world around us it is plain to see that "The Order out of Chaos" motto is afoot.
There is evident chaos in the world.. Revolutions, Earth Changes, Economic Collapse, WW3 blah blah blah.. Yes we have all heard the list already so I won't bore you... My point is that according to the plan of the global elite the migratory period prior to the establishment of "The New World Order", "The New Age Movement", "The Golden Dawn", "The Phoenix rising from the Ashes" and "The Age of Aquarius" is more than evidently taking place in this time of transition for humanity. It isn't so much the case of grasping at straws as it is of connecting the dots.

There is a whole occult side to the story also.. One that comes from a perspective of Secret Societies...
Where the likes of Annie Besant, Anton Levay, Alistair Crowley, Alice Ann Bailey and Albert Pike amongst many other New Agers, Occultists and Secret Society Members openly discuss the nature of Satan/Lucifer, The Son of the Morning.. The Morning Star as being pivotal to the coming New Age of Aquarius.

My opinion based on all the above is that i find it hard to believe that something is bubbling beneath the surface..
Something is coming.. Someone is coming.. and very soon...

The First Evolved Human of our Time (The Stargate Child!!)

Maybe I am way off the mark but I think there is something to all of this.
Like they say there is no smoke without fire…

I guess time will tell..




posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   


I'm going to let you in on a little secret. Being the One is just like being in love. No one can tell you you're in love, you just know it.


I think we all have the capability to be the One. However knowing the path and walking it are two different things.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by grey580



I'm going to let you in on a little secret. Being the One is just like being in love. No one can tell you you're in love, you just know it.


I think we all have the capability to be the One. However knowing the path and walking it are two different things.


Absoloutly, my point is someone has to be the one first... to lead the way.. the example for others to follow..
Yes there have been many ones before.. Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, Mother Terrasa, Ghandi, Krishnamurthi etc etc but the latar three in my opinion were lesser manifestations of the one..

When we see another Christ, Buddha or Mohammed then we will know that is the one..



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
GREAT post! I really liked all the references/details and all of your effort!!
Very interesting read! Thanks!!!!

So basically, many cultures are saying the same thing. What will happen, only time will tell.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by nakiannunaki
 


I'd never heard of the 666 seating arrangements before, so I looked it up:

Chamber Seating Plan

From this it appears that seat number 666 is indeed allocated in both the Strasbourg and Brussels chambers.

Urban myth or cover-up?

edit on 30/6/11 by lizziejayne because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by lizziejayne
reply to post by nakiannunaki
 


I'd never heard of the 666 seating arrangements before, so I looked it up:

Chamber Seating Plan

From this it appears that seat number 666 is indeed allocated in both the Strasbourg and Brussels chambers.

Urban myth or cover-up?

edit on 30/6/11 by lizziejayne because: (no reason given)


I have read it over the years from many different sources..

For example.. www.ianpaisley.org...

I had it legitamised by an established author also who included the information in one of her books but there is always the possibility.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by TETRA.X
GREAT post! I really liked all the references/details and all of your effort!!
Very interesting read! Thanks!!!!

So basically, many cultures are saying the same thing. What will happen, only time will tell.


Thanks, glad you like it.. i could have gone on for much longer but i didnt want to bore the reader too much



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Maybe I am missing something or over looked the point. But I don't see the supporting points in your post as to the star child. If you could please help me to understand your point and what evidence you have to support that would be awesome.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by nakiannunaki
 

Cheers for your reply


I admit it's intriguing that a MP and MEP is a key source for the info - definitely lends some weight to the theory IMO. Whether it's enough is a different matter I suppose.

But nevertheless a very interesting and intriguing proposal - cheers



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vodo34861
Maybe I am missing something or over looked the point. But I don't see the supporting points in your post as to the star child. If you could please help me to understand your point and what evidence you have to support that would be awesome.


I should have elaborated on that point..my bad!

I added "Star Child" to the thread title based on the astrological ties to the so called coming messiah.
You would have to venture in to subject matter relating to the Age of Aquarius to fully grasp the concept and then align that with the proposed "Rapture/Bluebeam" Alien connection.

My personal belief is that the new age messiah will very much be related to any alien disclosure we may hope to hear of in the coming months or years.

There is the case of "The Starchild Project" (en.wikipedia.org...) where the skull of an infant and mother where found in a Mexican Grave and was later believed to be of Alien origin..

Although this is slightly off topic to the bulk of the post there are correlations none the less, in my opinion between astrology and ancient civilisations/alien earth visitations to suggest the messiah will have some DNA slightly different to the rest of us.

Just to add (Edit) there is also the metaphysical aspect of "Overshadowing" when energy is transmitted from above or "the heavens" and in to the body or vessel of a human being.. Almost akin to a possession of some sort only with a messiah type figure that energy would be fully realised and to some degree controllable by the will of the host.
edit on 30-6-2011 by nakiannunaki because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
I would not put Alice A Bailey in the same category as Crowley and Levay etc. I have never read anything of hers that puts Lucifer as the pivotal point in the New Age. All her works that I have read place the Christ as the head of the hierarchy for earth.

Having said that I will say that that many great teachers have been on the earth, "the one" is more symbolic then literal. Meaning many with the Christ or Higher consciousness will come to teach humanity. In this age the authoritarian way of teaching from the past is being done away with. When great teachers like the Buddha or the Christ etc. come they will not proclaim themselves some great master/avatar/teacher etc. they will just teach true principles that will transform humanity, but will seem quite ordinary. They may be in a position of great influence like have media access or a great leader that gets world wide recognition somehow but will still seem just an ordinary person with extraordinary vision and teachings etc.

One of the greater ones will not come till a majority of humanity is prepared to accept his teachings in the manner I said above. Till then we will have lessor but great teachers preparing the way so to speak. I'd say we have at least a hundred years before we are ready as a whole. Right now the earth changes etc. are part of that preparation. Most of humanity will not look beyond the status quo until they feel enough pain.


edit on 30-6-2011 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
I would not put Alice A Bailey in the same category as Crowley and Levay etc. I have never read anything of hers that puts Lucifer as the pivotal point in the New Age. All her works that I have read place the Christ as the head of the hierarchy for earth.

Having said that I will say that that many great teachers have been on the earth, the one is more symbolic then literal. Meaning many with the Christ or Higher consciousness will come to teach humanity. In this age the authoritarian way of teaching is being done away with. When great teachers like the Buddha or the Christ etc. come they will not proclaim themself some great master/avatar/teacher etc. they will just teach true principles that will transform humanity, but will seem quite ordinary. they may be in a position of great influence like have media access or a great leader that gets world wide recognition somehow but will still seem just an ordinary guy person with extraordinary vision and teachings etc.

One of he greater ones will not come till a majority of humanity is prepared to accept his teachings in the manner I said above. Till then we will have lessor but great teachers preparing the way so to speak. I'd say we have at least a hundred years before we are ready as a whole. Right now the earth changes etc. are part of that preparation. Most of humanity will not look beyond the status quo until they feel enough pain.
edit on 30-6-2011 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)


I agree largly with what you wrote but i would say that 100 years is a long time away..
I think time works in many ways.. what we percieve as time may not actually be what it appears. In saying that i personally feel that things will manifest much more rapidly than first thought or outlined. But that is just my opinion based on how i have seen events unfold so rapidly and almost spiral out of control.. personally i don't see humanity making it another 100 years into the future without great spiritual intervention.

Also on the point of Alice AB she was partly responsible for setting up the Lucis Trust formally known as the Lucifer Trust and from what i have read of her she was heavily involved in the occult. That for me is enought to validate her inclusion in my opening post but you are welcome to your opinion also.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by nakiannunaki
 





Also on the point of Alice AB she was partly responsible for setting up the Lucis Trust formally known as the Lucifer Trust and from what i have read of her she was heavily involved in the occult. That for me is enought to validate her inclusion in my opening post but you are welcome to your opinion also.


This is the only criticism of Alice A. Bailey that, on the surface, has any validity, but that which appears on the surface is not always as it seems.

Alice A. Bailey was among other things a born-again Christian minister and a strong believer in Christ -- so why would she choose such a name?

The answer is that she was a serious student of the writings and works of H. P. Blavatsky and she had a magazine she named Lucifer. I believe this inspired Bailey to also use the name.

The next question is why did H. P. Blavatsky use this name?

The answer is this: When H. P. Blavatsky began her work she suffered vicious attacks by the Christian communities.

Finally Blavatsky came up with the ultimate idea of tweaking her enemies' emotions. She named her magazine Lucifer. This sealed her doom in the eyes of her opposition, for surely this was an open admission that she was in league with the devil himself.

But was it?

No, not by any means.

Why?

The answer will surprise most Bible readers and it is this:

Lucifer is NOT the name of Satan, any devils or adversaries of love and light.

Who does bear the name then?

According to the Bible it is Christ and the redeemed. Peter also used the name in a positive light.

But aren't we told that the one who fell was called Lucifer?

Answer: Yes, we are told that, but that was his name BEFORE he fell and was a bringer of light. Now one of his current titles is the "Prince of Darkness," a much different title than "Prince of Light" or "Bringer of Light," which is the meaning of the name Lucifer.

Here are some words Peter:

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts." (2 Peter 1:19)

The words "day star" is taken from the Greek word for Lucifer which is PHOSPHOROS.

Now let us literally retranslate:

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and Lucifer arise in your hearts."

If Lucifer refers to the devil himself maybe the Christian world should burn their Bibles.

Another variation of Lucifer is "Morning Star." Note the actual promise of Jesus to the faithful:

"And I will give him the morning star." (Rev 2:28)

Evidently Jesus will give us the power of Lucifer.

Even more shocking Jesus calls himself a Lucifer:

"I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." (Rev 22:16)

Let us literally retranslate this:

"I am the root and the offspring of David, and Lucifer." (Rev 22:16)

Morning Star is only translated as Lucifer once in most Bibles as follows:

"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north." (Isaiah 14:12-13)

Even here most Bible scholars believe Lucifer refers to the king of Babylon which was addressed by Isaiah. Nevertheless, Isaiah often spoke with dual meaning and this has a definite correspondence to a fallen being.

Lucifer is a Roman word applied to the Hebrew HEYLEL and the Greek PHOSPHOROS which literally means "One who brings or carries forth light." It could also be translated as "one who is able to hold light."

The name, Lucifer, which refers to a Son of the Morning, is not the name of one evil being, but is a reference to pristine and holy ancient beings who were conscious creators before this earth rolled into existence.

Here is another reference to the Lucifers:

4 "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

5 "Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

6 "Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

7 "When the morning stars (Lucifers) sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

(Job 38:4-7)

Now here is a thought. If the Lucifer that fell lost his status and there is more than one Lucifer (or bringer of light) -- that means there would be good ones out there somewhere.

Lucifer also refers to Venus and for good reason. It has been called the bright and morning star for thousands of years. When it is visible it will often be the only star (or planet) visible in the early morning light -- this the bringer of the new light of the morning.

Because the name Lucifer is now so rigidly associated with evil instead of light few dare use the term openly, but originally Lucifer was a glorious title.

Even though they were technically correct and on solid ground in the light to use the word, it was indeed not good public relations for H. P. Blavatsky or Alice A. Bailey to use this name, which is so misunderstood by humanity, and Bailey was wise to drop its use.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
I have some bad news for those who think the Age of Aquarius starts in 100 years or so

The astrological age is found by seeing which zodiac constellation the sun rises in on the morning of the spring equinox - the sun won’t rise in Aquarius for another 600 years

en.wikipedia.org...


The Austrian astronomer, Professor Hermann Haupt,[33] examined the question of when the Age of Aquarius begins in an article published in 1992 by the Austrian Academy of Science: with the German title "Der Beginn des Wassermannzeitalters, eine astronomische Frage?" ("The Start of the Aquarian Age, an Astronomical Question?"). Based on the boundaries accepted by IAU in 1928, Haupt's article investigates the start of the Age of Aquarius by calculating the entry of the spring equinox point over the parallel cycle (d = - 4°) between the constellations Pisces and Aquarius and reaches, using the usual formula of precession (Gliese, 1982), the year 2595. However Haupt concludes:


Check it out for your self

This is a free sky chart program
www.ap-i.net...

enter - dawn of the spring equinox in the observatory set up and see where the constellations are



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by nakiannunaki
 





Also on the point of Alice AB she was partly responsible for setting up the Lucis Trust formally known as the Lucifer Trust and from what i have read of her she was heavily involved in the occult. That for me is enought to validate her inclusion in my opening post but you are welcome to your opinion also.


This is the only criticism of Alice A. Bailey that, on the surface, has any validity, but that which appears on the surface is not always as it seems.

Alice A. Bailey was among other things a born-again Christian minister and a strong believer in Christ -- so why would she choose such a name?

The answer is that she was a serious student of the writings and works of H. P. Blavatsky and she had a magazine she named Lucifer. I believe this inspired Bailey to also use the name.

The next question is why did H. P. Blavatsky use this name?

The answer is this: When H. P. Blavatsky began her work she suffered vicious attacks by the Christian communities.

Finally Blavatsky came up with the ultimate idea of tweaking her enemies' emotions. She named her magazine Lucifer. This sealed her doom in the eyes of her opposition, for surely this was an open admission that she was in league with the devil himself.

But was it?

No, not by any means.

Why?

The answer will surprise most Bible readers and it is this:

Lucifer is NOT the name of Satan, any devils or adversaries of love and light.

Who does bear the name then?

According to the Bible it is Christ and the redeemed. Peter also used the name in a positive light.

But aren't we told that the one who fell was called Lucifer?

Answer: Yes, we are told that, but that was his name BEFORE he fell and was a bringer of light. Now one of his current titles is the "Prince of Darkness," a much different title than "Prince of Light" or "Bringer of Light," which is the meaning of the name Lucifer.

Here are some words Peter:

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts." (2 Peter 1:19)

The words "day star" is taken from the Greek word for Lucifer which is PHOSPHOROS.

Now let us literally retranslate:

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and Lucifer arise in your hearts."

If Lucifer refers to the devil himself maybe the Christian world should burn their Bibles.

Another variation of Lucifer is "Morning Star." Note the actual promise of Jesus to the faithful:

"And I will give him the morning star." (Rev 2:28)

Evidently Jesus will give us the power of Lucifer.

Even more shocking Jesus calls himself a Lucifer:

"I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." (Rev 22:16)

Let us literally retranslate this:

"I am the root and the offspring of David, and Lucifer." (Rev 22:16)

Morning Star is only translated as Lucifer once in most Bibles as follows:

"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north." (Isaiah 14:12-13)

Even here most Bible scholars believe Lucifer refers to the king of Babylon which was addressed by Isaiah. Nevertheless, Isaiah often spoke with dual meaning and this has a definite correspondence to a fallen being.

Lucifer is a Roman word applied to the Hebrew HEYLEL and the Greek PHOSPHOROS which literally means "One who brings or carries forth light." It could also be translated as "one who is able to hold light."

The name, Lucifer, which refers to a Son of the Morning, is not the name of one evil being, but is a reference to pristine and holy ancient beings who were conscious creators before this earth rolled into existence.

Here is another reference to the Lucifers:

4 "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

5 "Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

6 "Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

7 "When the morning stars (Lucifers) sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

(Job 38:4-7)

Now here is a thought. If the Lucifer that fell lost his status and there is more than one Lucifer (or bringer of light) -- that means there would be good ones out there somewhere.

Lucifer also refers to Venus and for good reason. It has been called the bright and morning star for thousands of years. When it is visible it will often be the only star (or planet) visible in the early morning light -- this the bringer of the new light of the morning.

Because the name Lucifer is now so rigidly associated with evil instead of light few dare use the term openly, but originally Lucifer was a glorious title.

Even though they were technically correct and on solid ground in the light to use the word, it was indeed not good public relations for H. P. Blavatsky or Alice A. Bailey to use this name, which is so misunderstood by humanity, and Bailey was wise to drop its use.


Yes i have read much of what you put forward through my theosophical learning. You are correct in that many church goers would see what is proposed above as blasphemeous but i would have to concur with you that in fact Lucifer is the morning star as is Christ. That is according to the new testament somthing i am still slightly dubious of when pitted againts the old testement. Yes they are both probably writtern by the long line of generations all involved with the new dawn but i personally feel the new testement was added later to coincide with plans already laid out and in effect today in our world.

Yet i still struggle with the idea of upsetting the God that most manistream religious folk lend their faith to as opposed to lending my faith to the more new age or old occult ideologies presented in your reply.

Part of me says that, for arguments sake, the old god is becoming outdated and the new god is becoming popular, this is evident in the culture of popular music especially and the many references discussed between hiphop music and the occult. It has already begun to rise in movies and games... themes around cults and mysticsm but what is worrying is that it is always painted in a negative light.. one of darkness and evil.

Perhaps that is the intent , to allow humanity to manifest the darkness within and open it up for the world to see?

There are lots of metaphysical elements at play i just find it diffcult to lend my faith to any one particular ideology so i choose to remain open to them all.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by racasan
I have some bad news for those who think the Age of Aquarius starts in 100 years or so

The astrological age is found by seeing which zodiac constellation the sun rises in on the morning of the spring equinox - the sun won’t rise in Aquarius for another 600 years

en.wikipedia.org...


The Austrian astronomer, Professor Hermann Haupt,[33] examined the question of when the Age of Aquarius begins in an article published in 1992 by the Austrian Academy of Science: with the German title "Der Beginn des Wassermannzeitalters, eine astronomische Frage?" ("The Start of the Aquarian Age, an Astronomical Question?"). Based on the boundaries accepted by IAU in 1928, Haupt's article investigates the start of the Age of Aquarius by calculating the entry of the spring equinox point over the parallel cycle (d = - 4°) between the constellations Pisces and Aquarius and reaches, using the usual formula of precession (Gliese, 1982), the year 2595. However Haupt concludes:


Check it out for your self

This is a free sky chart program
www.ap-i.net...

enter - dawn of the spring equinox in the observatory set up and see where the constellations are



Thanks for your post, i have heard this before. There are those that believe that Maitraya or the 5th Buddah (World Teacher) isn't due any time soon and i sympathise. Same goes for the Age of Aquarius. But we can not discount the many people who already believe that both Maitreya is already on the earth and that we have already entered or are on the cusp of entering the age of aquarius.

It is as much about faith, belief and ideologies as it is about astrology.

Like the age old saying goes.. when the student is ready the master will come... I think the student (humanity) will be ready well before 600 years pass us.. the reason being that suffering can only exist for a set amount of time , until humanity outgrow the cyclic energy it poses.. that suffering is already here with us and yes i would say it has only just really started but i dont see it going on for much longer.. if it does then it will mean simply that humanity would have experienced global catastrophe akin to WW3 or ELE or an armeggedon apocolypse type scenario after which i honestly dont see any of anything mattering.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by nakiannunaki
 


Well first this is about astronomy not astrology

If the rule is that the Age of Aquarius doesn’t start till the sun rises in Aquarius on the spring equinox – then the Age of Aquarius is still 600 years away

(this is just a general observation - not aimed at anybody)
Second I would be more impressed by claims of "spiritual evolution" made by people who are actually dealing with the world’s problems – you know – fixing stuff like an adult would rather than waiting for Jesus to fly down with his 8 tiny reindeer to fix it for them - for example

edit on 30-6-2011 by racasan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by racasan
reply to post by nakiannunaki
 


Well first this is about astronomy not astrology

If the rule is that the Age of Aquarius doesn’t start till the sun rises in Aquarius on the spring equinox – then the Age of Aquarius is still 600 years away

(this is just a general observation - not aimed at anybody)
Second I would be more impressed by claims of "spiritual evolution" made by people who are actually dealing with the world’s problems – you know – fixing stuff like an adult would rather than waiting for Jesus to fly down with his 8 tiny reindeer to fix it for them - for example

edit on 30-6-2011 by racasan because: (no reason given)


Fair enough dude



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
One of the greater ones will not come till a majority of humanity is prepared to accept his teachings in the manner I said above. Till then we will have lessor but great teachers preparing the way so to speak. I'd say we have at least a hundred years before we are ready as a whole. Right now the earth changes etc. are part of that preparation. Most of humanity will not look beyond the status quo until they feel enough pain.



I sadly agree with you.

I do think some in our government are in contact - - and are trying to bring about peaceful control via a One World Rule (not NWO Conspiracy).

We are too immature yet - to evolve to the next level.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 03:45 PM
link   
I don't agree with the viewpoint that "The One" is an individual we are all waiting to see... separate from ourselves.

We... collectively... are "The One".

It's right there in the name.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join