WIXLIB

book is not about Jesus of biblical revelation. I would run from this book and the cults that springup around it.im sure this will get deleted quickly so read up and flee.Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12327160right on, except I will leave the copy of your post. the book is very much about the Jesus of biblicalrevelation, 1/3 of the book is directly devoted to his teachings which are NOT in your silly andincomplete bible. You are banned now.Anonymous CowardUser ID: 12278325United States03/11/2012 01:20 PMProblem is Nobody in Particular, you don't believe in the UB either as you think Jesus died inIndia. You have many beliefs contrary to what the UB teaches.Nobody in Particular (OP)Where are your I AM's sleepy ones?User ID: 12018334United States03/11/2012 01:30 PMProblem is Nobody in Particular, you don't believe in the UB either as you think Jesus died inIndia. You have many beliefs contrary to what the UB teaches.Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12278325Problem is the UB does not tell the whole story. Michael of Nebadon LEFT, the BODY did not dieand Esu continued to India. At the time of the material being given, this was NOT TO BE KNOWNbecause they murder people, dig up sites and destroy information. This was revealed in the 1960'when A priest was taken to the old grave to get the materials scribed by Judas, who also was notthe betrayer, that Esu's son Joseph took to the old grave after Esu did pass in India.You cannot give pearls to THUGS and sadly the priest and all his known family were murdered,but some of the material found was translated into German from the Aramaic by Billy Meier. Andthen into English by another from the German. It is also covered in PJ #2I don't "believe" in the UB, I KNOW WHAT IS IT and far more about it than even its readersbelieve. it is a masterpiece of information for this sad little world. Even if they did have to withholdsome pearls. Michael of Nebadon himself is the main author of the Phoenix Journals with Esu andothers taking lesser roles. And If I have a "belief" I will state such, because a belief is not knowing.Its is something suspected to be true. The incarnation of Michael was shared with Esu Immanuel-- AH- Candace GLP #4 -- page. 6

and I have taught that here until I could gag almost.You can read PJ #2 here, And they Called His Name Sananda, which is done mostly by Esu andJudas. [link to www.freewebs.com] click on PJ #2 to download it and also I highly recommend youread #3.Here is the linky to The Talmud of Immanuel, the english translation of the German translation ofthe Aramaic of the scrolls Joseph Esu's son returned to the olden grave. [link to fourwinds10.com]Now and I wish I had put a BIG X on the page, the UB does one time mention there was anotheras part of the incarnation. But they state they don't know what happened to him.I am in partnership with Christ Michael, and Esu. We have formed the 2nd Coming Organizationand my team puts out what they want put out. So be it. And the story of the shared incarnation isaccurate. Actually a creator son cannot be incarnate in a matter body, there was a linkage. Allspirit beings can set up a brain connection and view the world thru the eyes of the human brain,and experience the thoughts and emotions. Michael accompained Esu ore accurately in thismanner but that said Esu is a spirit being from Paradise also, having earned it over his longascension, so he was never "in" the body either. The body was shared . I am not "in" my bodyeither. I cannot be as Spirit being either, if I moved into this body, it would immediately beincinerated and rather useless then.Anonymous CowardUser ID: 12278325United States03/11/2012 02:25 PM"the UB does one time mention there was another as part of the incarnation. But they state theydon't know what happened to him.And the story of the shared incarnation is accurate. Actually a creator son cannot be incarnate ina matter body, there was a linkage."As it was related, the Melchizideks are not privy to the secrets of Sonarington.Accordingly, "we" don't know how the incarnation was achieved, but to deny that reality precludesChrist Michael as having achieved true 7-stage Creator Son status.I do have a lot of respect for your knowledge of the UB, but resorting to Billy Meier's time travels isnot credible to substantiate the Journals.Nobody in Particular (OP)Where are your I AM's sleepy ones?User ID: 12018334United States03/11/2012 02:31 PM-- AH- Candace GLP #4 -- page. 7

"the UB does one time mention there was another as part of the incarnation. But they state theydon't know what happened to him.And the story of the shared incarnation is accurate. Actually a creator son cannot be incarnate ina matter body, there was a linkage."As it was related, the Melchizideks are not privy to the secrets of Sonarington.Accordingly, "we" don't know how the incarnation was achieved, but to deny that reality precludesChrist Michael as having achieved true 7-stage Creator Son status.I do have a lot of respect for your knowledge of the UB, but resorting to Billy Meier's time travels isnot credible to substantiate the Journals.Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12278325since when do Billy Meiers journeys have anything to do with the Journals? And since when DID IRESORT to any such thing? Stop putting in WORDS I DID NOT SAY or Write. There is NORELation anyway of Billy to the PJ's. And I have no idea if he did "time traveling". He was in opencontact with Pleiadians and did travel on Physical craft to other planets. Now lets get back to thepurpose of this thread. Placing UB favorites on it.And what does what Melchizedeks having privy to Sonarington or not, have to do with THISdiscussion?There are 2 things that I do not like, one is somebody placing lies about me or family or my team.The other is purposely changing my words or what I say. Do NOT DO IT, either will result inbanning from my threads.Anonymous CowardUser ID: 12278325United States03/11/2012 03:14 PM"the UB does one time mention there was another as part of the incarnation. But they state theydon't know what happened to him.And the story of the shared incarnation is accurate. Actually a creator son cannot be incarnate ina matter body, there was a linkage."As it was related, the Melchizideks are not privy to the secrets of Sonarington.Accordingly, "we" don't know how the incarnation was achieved, but to deny that reality precludes-- AH- Candace GLP #4 -- page. 8

Christ Michael as having achieved true 7-stage Creator Son status.I do have a lot of respect for your knowledge of the UB, but resorting to Billy Meier's time travels isnot credible to substantiate the Journals.Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12278325since when do Billy Meiers journeys have anything to do with the Journals? And since when DID IRESORT to any such thing? Stop putting in WORDS I DID NOT SAY or Write. There is NORELation anyway of Billy to the PJ's. And I have no idea if he did "time traveling". He was in opencontact with Pleiadians and did travel on Physical craft to other planets. Now lets get back to thepurpose of this thread. Placing UB favorites on it.And what does what Melchizedeks having privy to Sonarington or not, have to do with THISdiscussion?There are 2 things that I do not like, one is somebody placing lies about me or family or my team.The other is purposely changing my words or what I say. Do NOT DO IT, either will result inbanning from my threads.Quoting: Nobody in ParticularThe source of the Gospel of Jmmanuel is Billy Meier. If you say there is no relation, I standcorrected.However, you deny the Incarnation as Christ Michael as Jesus of Nazareth and substitute a falsesurrogate. Similarly, you deny the Resurrection as the body didn't die, but rather the Spirit left andthe body lived. In so doing, you are denying the "immediate dissolution" of the Corpse of Christ.No need to ban me from your thread, I take leave.Celia D.User ID: 11455637United States03/11/2012 03:26 PM"All teach that God is within you, and that your relationship with God is PERSONAL. It does notrequire the intercession of others."Yet, here you are, as usual. Perhaps we all have the ability to take care of ourselves. I doubt weneed anyone's dogma, rules, regulations, explanations, etc. Since we only live 80 years or so, I'msure someone will fill us in at a later point, if need be.Nobody in Particular (OP)Where are your I AM's sleepy ones?User ID: 12018334United States03/11/2012 05:44 PM-- AH- Candace GLP #4 -- page. 9

"the UB does one time mention there was another as part of the incarnation. But they state theydon't know what happened to him.And the story of the shared incarnation is accurate. Actually a creator son cannot be incarnate ina matter body, there was a linkage."As it was related, the Melchizideks are not privy to the secrets of Sonarington.Accordingly, "we" don't know how the incarnation was achieved, but to deny that reality precludesChrist Michael as having achieved true 7-stage Creator Son status.I do have a lot of respect for your knowledge of the UB, but resorting to Billy Meier's time travels isnot credible to substantiate the Journals.Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12278325since when do Billy Meiers journeys have anything to do with the Journals? And since when DID IRESORT to any such thing? Stop putting in WORDS I DID NOT SAY or Write. There is NORELation anyway of Billy to the PJ's. And I have no idea if he did "time traveling". He was in opencontact with Pleiadians and did travel on Physical craft to other planets. Now lets get back to thepurpose of this thread. Placing UB favorites on it.And what does what Melchizedeks having privy to Sonarington or not, have to do with THISdiscussion?There are 2 things that I do not like, one is somebody placing lies about me or family or my team.The other is purposely changing my words or what I say. Do NOT DO IT, either will result inbanning from my threads.Quoting: Nobody in ParticularThe source of the Gospel of Jmmanuel is Billy Meier. If you say there is no relation, I standcorrected.However, you deny the Incarnation as Christ Michael as Jesus of Nazareth and substitute a falsesurrogate. Similarly, you deny the Resurrection as the body didn't die, but rather the Spirit left andthe body lived. In so doing, you are denying the "immediate dissolution" of the Corpse of Christ.No need to ban me from your thread, I take leave.Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12278325I do not deny the incarnation of Christ MIchael. I said a spirit being with PHOTON mind, let me add-- AH- Candace GLP #4 -- page. 10

that, cannot reside inside of human flesh. And even the human spirit doesn't reside in it either forthat matter on earth, even the morontial form does not YET. Except in a few who have merged. Icannot reside in my flesh as I am a photon spirit being. There is a MIND TO MIND CONNECTION.the Talmud is from actual papers left behind and they are on craft, in safekeeping, what is left ofthem and I have seen them, tattered and in the aramaic. Go to the links I provided and READ ofyou having any interest. The priest Isa Rashid and Billy, that found them were taken to the oldgrave as I have said where they were found. You can take the truth or not. It is your decision. Icare not, but when untruth is posted here I am going to either delete it, or correct it.And in the OT it was said, IMMANUEL was coming, regards the other issues as the messiah andthat was Esu Immanuel. Two minds shared the body. You may even had spirit beings surroundyou and use your body to look out off. No biggy deal. There was no dissolution of the Body. Thatwas TOLD on purpose in the UB so the thugs of this world would NOT be looking for descendantsor the body. It allowed both of them to get the hell out of that hell hole and continue the teachingelsewhere, which was planned anyway in the beginning and it became necessary to let thecrucifixion happen, so Michael could leave, and prepare the bestowal of the Spirit of Truth, asthose records in the UB are correct, and it allowed Esu to teach in central asia and India. I KNOWTHESE ONES, beloved, and that is HOW IT IS.Nobody in Particular (OP)Where are your I AM's sleepy ones?User ID: 12018334United States03/15/2012 04:04 PM[link to www.urantia.org]5. The Love of God(38.6) 2:5.1 “God is love”; therefore his only personal attitude towards the affairs of the universe isalways a reaction of divine affection. The Father loves us sufficiently to bestow his life upon us.“He makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good and sends rain on the just and on theunjust.”(39.1) 2:5.2 It is wrong to think of God as being coaxed into loving his children because ofthe sacrifices of his Sons or the intercession of his subordinate creatures, “for the Fatherhimself loves you.” It is in response to this paternal affection that God sends the marvelousAdjusters to indwell the minds of men. God’s love is universal; “whosoever will may come.” Hewould “have all men be saved by coming into the knowledge of the truth.” He is “not willing thatany should perish.”(39.2) 2:5.3 The Creators are the very first to attempt to save man from the disastrous results ofhis foolish transgression of the divine laws. God’s love is by nature a fatherly affection; therefore-- AH- Candace GLP #4 -- page. 11

does he sometimes “chasten us for our own profit, that we may be partakers of his holiness.” Evenduring your fiery trials remember that “in all our afflictions he is afflicted with us.”(39.3) 2:5.4 God is divinely kind to sinners. When rebels return to righteousness, they aremercifully received, “for our God will abundantly pardon.” “I am he who blots out yourtransgressions for my own sake, and I will not remember your sins.” “Behold what mannerof love the Father has bestowed upon us that we should be called the sons of God.”(39.4) 2:5.5 After all, the greatest evidence of the goodness of God and the supreme reason forloving him is the indwelling gift of the Father — the Adjuster who so patiently awaits the hour whenyou both shall be eternally made one. Though you cannot find God by searching, if you willsubmit to the leading of the indwelling spirit, you will be unerringly guided, step by step,life by life, through universe upon universe, and age by age, until you finally stand in thepresence of the Paradise personality of the Universal Father.(39.5) 2:5.6 How unreasonable that you should not worship God because the limitations of humannature and the handicaps of your material creation make it impossible for you to see him.Between you and God there is a tremendous distance (physical space) to be traversed.There likewise exists a great gulf of spiritual differential which must be bridged; butnotwithstanding all that physically and spiritually separates you from the Paradise personalpresence of God, stop and ponder the solemn fact that God lives within you; he has in hisown way already bridged the gulf. He has sent of himself, his spirit, to live in you and to toilwith you as you pursue your eternal universe career.(39.6) 2:5.7 I find it easy and pleasant to worship one who is so great and at the same time soaffectionately devoted to the uplifting ministry of his lowly creatures. I naturally love one who is sopowerful in creation and in the control thereof, and yet who is so perfect in goodness and sofaithful in the loving-kindness which constantly overshadows us. I think I would love God just asmuch if he were not so great and powerful, as long as he is so good and merciful. We all love theFather more because of his nature than in recognition of his amazing attributes.(39.7) 2:5.8 When I observe the Creator Sons and their subordinate administrators struggling sovaliantly with the manifold difficulties of time inherent in the evolution of the universes of space, Idiscover that I bear these lesser rulers of the universes a great and profound affection. After all, Ithink we all, including the mortals of the realms, love the Universal Father and all other beings,divine or human, because we discern that these personalities truly love us. The experience ofloving is very much a direct response to the experience of being loved. Knowing that God lovesme, I should continue to love him supremely, even though he were divested of all his attributes ofsupremacy, ultimacy, and absoluteness.(40.1) 2:5.9 The Father’s love follows us now and throughout the endless circle of the eternalages. As you ponder the loving nature of God, there is only one reasonable and naturalpersonality reaction thereto: You will increasingly love your Maker; you will yield to God anaffection analogous to that given by a child to an earthly parent; for, as a father, a real father, atrue father, loves his children, so the Universal Father loves and forever seeks the welfare of hiscreated sons and daughters.(40.2) 2:5.10 But the love of God is an intelligent and farseeing parental affection. The divine lovefunctions in unified association with divine wisdom and all other infinite characteristics of theperfect nature of the Universal Father. God is love, but love is not God. The greatest manifestationof the divine love for mortal beings is observed in the bestowal of the Thought Adjusters, but yourgreatest revelation of the Father’s love is seen in the bestowal life of his Son Michael as he livedon earth the ideal spiritual life. It is the indwelling Adjuster who individualizes the love of God to-- AH- Candace GLP #4 -- page. 12

each human soul.(40.3) 2:5.11 At times I am almost pained to be compelled to portray the divine affection of theheavenly Father for his universe children by the employment of the human word symbol love. Thisterm, even though it does connote man’s highest concept of the mortal relations of respect anddevotion, is so frequently designative of so much of human relationship that is wholly ignoble andutterly unfit to be known by any word which is also used to indicate the matchless affection of theliving God for his universe creatures! How unfortunate that I cannot make use of some supernaland exclusive term which would convey to the min

Discovering the Urantia Book Nobody in Particular (OP) Where are your I AM's sleepy ones? User ID: 12018334 United States 03/11/2012 10:27 AM is the bride of CHRIST the whole 144,000? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10750949 No the bride is all those who are made their final choice