Questions on 'Lazarus'- 14th November 1993

Question: We have gone to the Bible and followed through with your clues, have we been correct?

As it was told.



Do you have any further comments?

"Lazarus" was not his actual name. He was unnamed also.

Question: J.W. has suggested that there was a dual authorship of the Gospel of St. John - is this true?

Yes and no.
The formulation of the Holy Scripture was not accidental. There was no part which was mistaken, nor part which was not in correlation with many.

The specific ascribing, the 'penning' and subsequent responsibility was of John's.

'Lazarus' needed to be free to wander amongst men, as he is wont to do, and was allowed distinction from the work to enable him to 'cover' from a differing direction.

Bruce was correct - the Master Christian Rosenkreutz was called forth and awakened to perfection. In his final death, as recorded, (viz. Lazarus) he did find the way for others also - a new route to go, so to say - for there are many of these also.

Initiation of its own was not markedly unique to the world; consciousness was half there, anyway. One cannot fully comprehend the implication during the death-sleep - what was entailed, who was met with and what precisely was brought back.

Our beloved Master C.R. was the successful candidate, and in the fusion of events, there was martyrdom resigned. For the two noble souls (St. J. & C.R.) did not grapple with a divine destiny, they complied, and became leaders at the front - orienteers.

Such men do not cease to be human. There are glamorous misconceptions which pronounce a Master to be so divine he is as separate to you or I; or so far removed that he is above the comprehension of the daily contests. However this is not the case, they have not the angelic withdrawal, and are sensitive to the individual stirrings and affectations of any man.

Secrecy is a great protector. It has been in the past, that the respect as issued is warranted, and details of movements and even heritage are uncalled-for. Just as the royal family goes about with consorts to guard, it is the veiling attendants which move about the Masters, shielding them from undue arrest. Even we have regarded much of their business to be their business.

Of course there is much that may be and should be shared also. One cannot, as difficult as it is however, come from the approach of trying to make all things fit, for it is an approach which dictates obscure outcomes. There are parallel roads, which, when thoroughly investigated are 'in line' with others - and there is a difference in this. These parallel roads are designed to meet at intermittent conjunction, but not all the time do they blend so, for they would not then be separately useful.

Johfra Bosschart

It is as this also: The work of one Master is uniquely different in his approach and conduct to that of another - and this is of necessity we might add. But the two specific tasks are dependent upon the success of the other, and are in no way confused by the extreme distinctions.

Question: Margaret has asked about the term 'deva incarnation', and what that might mean?

"A one to whom the devas find dear" - for their involvements were such that they are sought after, having returned to try another life; and the friendships established are renewed, in a manner of speaking. For the deva knows not of the time having passed and is eager to reacquaint with their beloved friend.

Certain periods historically, have allowed the men therein to cross the threshold through to the etheric plains and partake in the communities which reside there. These men or women (or children) were innocent in nature, not barbaric or violent, uncouth or demon-bound, but enjoyed a clarity of perception into the fine light of the adjoining world. The relationships were never bestial; they were cordially loving - one being flesh, one being fairy.