You are partially correct.
Not by some, but believed by many.
And he was feared by the ruling religious elite.
How would Jesus identify himself today?
- Thread starter Kathie Bondar
- Start date
You are partially correct.
Not by some, but believed by many.
And he was feared by the ruling religious elite.
Does the 7 year clean up after a 3 hour rampage help put color on the canvas?
He goes out and tries to hang himself only to have the branch break and then he falls over a cliff onto the rocks below. Sometimes the day that start out bad just grts worse the whole way through it, just sayin . . .
I put up this thread because I have actually published a study on the telepathic method of identifying people in their previous lives. I have defined telepathy as the universal means of communication, an automatic language interpreter. Without this skill you can't even begin to think of identifying people in their past lives.
I have identified a large a number of historical persons, world leaders such as Moses and Lenin, religious leaders such as Jesus and Buddha, scientists such as Archimedes and Einstein... and so on and so on. We are reborn on earth approx. one in a thousand years, the other time we live in the parallel universe, which is very similar to this one.
Everybody has telepathy, although most are not aware of. It is akin to someone whispering to you in the dark, can't be seen only heard if you are listening intently.
I've wondered about this, with population growth & 7 billion plus people
currently on this planet now, with recycling souls, are they constantly
being created also, or subdivided, or what? If they're constantly being
created, wouldn't it be more efficient to just create more than recycle
some of the existing souls through reincarnation?
If you've identified world leaders such as Moses and Lenin, religious
leaders such as Jesus and Buddha, scientists such as Archimedes
and Einstein... and so on and so on.....subdividing of a finite number
of souls would lead credence to your claim, as thousands of current
people might have a 'slice' of Lenin's soul, ect....and make it plausible
to identify so many famous peoples, as thousands might have 'been'
Lenin .... and thousands might have been Marie Antoinette, and so on?
If not, then there have been so many more....uhm, nobodies (? people
of no real historical significance?)....than there have been Kings and
Queens and Popes and such....and the odds of someone with a
recycled soul being anyone who was significant historically and crossing
your path to be identified would be beyond numerically astronomical.
If the pattern is 'live a life' and then take a thousand year weekend in a
parallel universe, and then repeat, how is it that most of the names that
you've sited are 'recent' in the thousand year span you noted (approx.) or
is that a coincidence for the sake of getting a point across with identifiable
names? I'm not knocking anything. I'm just curious.
Maybe that's it, Ron, and it helps to explain how there is a little Jesus in everyone (even if they don't like it!).
lulz
Well then I wouldn't be in accounting for very long, would I?
But Ron poses a valid question. If the cycle is one thousand years before reincarnation, how can those who've died less than one thousand years ago have been identified as being reincarnated. One obvious possibility is an inability to accurately count to one thousand. Seems a reasonable hypothesis.
Well, a thousand years approximately. The O.P. might be using names
that are an exception to this rule for the sake of getting a point across
with identifiable names, but I don't know.
Could be that using 1000+ year old famous names would be not so
easily identifiable for the example to the majority of people reading this
(or the other) thread?
A thousand years ago, with so few people, and so little broad travel for
the majority of people, most folks wouldn't even need a surname beyond
perhaps the name of their village (like "Ron from/of Regina" or "Ron the
Rock Crusher" and not "Ron the Lemon Squeezer")...
Lenin and Einstein convey a different image than "Bob the Blacksmith" or
"Freddy the Turnip farmer" in recognizable names...but that leads back to
the question of there being more Bob's & Ron's & Freddy's than names
that would be historically significant.
that are an exception to this rule for the sake of getting a point across
with identifiable names, but I don't know.
Could be that using 1000+ year old famous names would be not so
easily identifiable for the example to the majority of people reading this
(or the other) thread?
A thousand years ago, with so few people, and so little broad travel for
the majority of people, most folks wouldn't even need a surname beyond
perhaps the name of their village (like "Ron from/of Regina" or "Ron the
Rock Crusher" and not "Ron the Lemon Squeezer")...
Lenin and Einstein convey a different image than "Bob the Blacksmith" or
"Freddy the Turnip farmer" in recognizable names...but that leads back to
the question of there being more Bob's & Ron's & Freddy's than names
that would be historically significant.
can you see this conflicted life I lead? My Jesus is continuously admonishing my Stalin and sometimes I just want to put a bullet through them. I think I can get them both with one shot. ;?D
Last edited:
He would be the guy insisting that every weekend be a 3 day weekend -Fri Sat, Sun............
Ah yes, why didn't I see that. The DeLorean should have been my first clue.
But the thing is, sometimes the most profound insights can be found in the simplest of things. Without looking for the meaning of things we wouldn't know.
