they are "nothing" and "less than nothing", "spittle" ...
That represents your individual choice of evaluation within the same collective balance. The consequences of each choice are collectively shared, and so if you use suggestion of devaluation towards others, you grow the imbalance within the ignored balance everyone shares.
All others represent inspiration (need) and temptation (want) for your choice, and it's on you how to utilize them.
As for nothing...allow yourself to question the origin of "nothing"? Can one perceive nothing or was the concept of nothing suggested by the choice others; while requiring your choice of consent to work? Nothing stands for no-thing...how could one thing (you) within everything perceive no-thing? Having perception implies being the response to perceptible, so how can a without (nothing) exist in a within (everything)?
depending upon their genetics
a) genetics as suggested represents growth; which implies it being a seed within a soil to grow in. Therefore, temporary growth (form) depends on ongoing loss (flow); just like life (form) depends on being moved from inception towards death (flow).
b) genetics as perceived implies "generation"; yet as form within flow; as choice within balance; as temporary within ongoing etc. one represents "regeneration" aka response to being generated. This is why genetics are suggested as geneticism under the umbrella of scientism, hence implying under choice (suggestion) to choice (consent) contract law...the inversion of balance (offer) to choice (response) natural law.
hold whatever ideals they like
That represents the choice to want (like) suggested information (ideals) by others; which are being held as idolized meaning within ones memory (mind). Responding to a memory filled with suggested information represents the ego.
for now, and express them as they see fit.
"now" aka the moment(um) that is forever; "express" aka the temporary form expressing the ongoing flow, and "as they see fit" aka perceiving ALL perceivable through the lens of ONEs comprehension; shaped by free will of choice aka need (by perceived inspiration) or want (by suggested information).
plenty are WITHIN "time"
Exchange the suggested label "time" with the perceived "movement" and it allows comprehension about a) each ONE (form) within ALL (flow) exists within movement, and b) the ONEness (energy) of ALL (flow/form) is moving. Movement doesn't require a label like "time" to communicate itself to those being moved within.
not be relative to them
The relation of those within movement with the movement itself represents the self differentiation of velocity (flow) into resistance (form); which together represent momentum (balance in motion); while individually loss (flow) and growth (form) aka the internal power; balance; self sustenance of energy (the ONEness of ALL aka the generator for all regeneration within).
As for explaining this...comprehension represents the ONE seed within the soil of ALL perceived, and keeping comprehension/perception in resonance with balance requires the constant struggle of choice to adapt to perceived inspiration (need); while resisting suggested information (want). Falling for the latter causes the imbalance (want vs not want) within the ignored balance (need/want).
Lies (not want) represent the contradiction to a consented to truth (want) suggested beforehand. Just like non-believers (not want) are defined by the same suggestion as believers (want).
Consent (want or not want) to any suggested -ism causes the want versus not want conflict among those consenting; which in return gives those suggesting the sole power to define (suggestion); redefine (revisionism) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) the meaning of the suggested for all those who are reasoning (want vs not want) about it.
Truth vs false represents the redefinition of want vs not want. It's the same choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law underneath every conflict in this system; because this system implies perceived balance (offer) to choice (response) natural law.
Question the origin (suggestion) of your consented to "truth"; instead of fighting others over pointed out contradictions; which you perceive as lies. Try using implication (if/then) over reason (want vs not want aka true vs false aka believing vs not believing etc.) and you won't find yourself consenting to conflicts anymore.
All nations before him are as nothing
a) nation - "a people" implies each perceivable "one" of them; while nothing suggests "no one" aka none; nothing; nothingness.
b) all existence implies ONEness of ALL and the ONEs within ALL.
c) yes vs no represents the rebranding of want (yes) vs not want (no).
d) the hebrew use of nothing from the Greek "ou oudeis" is for claims aka choice of want (suggested) over choice of need (perceived).
Ask yourself why you consent to everything suggested within the bible (want) ; while ignoring what the perceived (need) was shaped out of?
are LESS than less than nothing
You chose to evaluate others as such; while using the suggested scripture as the justification for your choices. It's your free will of choice to do so. I'm inspired by the origin of the suggested "nothing" others use to justify the ignorance of perceived "everything".
their philosophies and beliefs
Who suggested them "their" -isms and why are those who consent to believe or not believe what others suggest "claiming" it's theirs?
"patris et filii et spiritus sancti" (btw allegory for ALL; ONE, and ONEs adaptation to ALL) is being suggested "in nomine" aka in the name of others. Consenting to that doesn't make it your belief or philosophy; yet once again both believers and non-believers are claiming ownership over "their" point of views.
That represents your individual choice of evaluation within the same collective balance. The consequences of each choice are collectively shared, and so if you use suggestion of devaluation towards others, you grow the imbalance within the ignored balance everyone shares.
All others represent inspiration (need) and temptation (want) for your choice, and it's on you how to utilize them.
As for nothing...allow yourself to question the origin of "nothing"? Can one perceive nothing or was the concept of nothing suggested by the choice others; while requiring your choice of consent to work? Nothing stands for no-thing...how could one thing (you) within everything perceive no-thing? Having perception implies being the response to perceptible, so how can a without (nothing) exist in a within (everything)?
a) genetics as suggested represents growth; which implies it being a seed within a soil to grow in. Therefore, temporary growth (form) depends on ongoing loss (flow); just like life (form) depends on being moved from inception towards death (flow).
b) genetics as perceived implies "generation"; yet as form within flow; as choice within balance; as temporary within ongoing etc. one represents "regeneration" aka response to being generated. This is why genetics are suggested as geneticism under the umbrella of scientism, hence implying under choice (suggestion) to choice (consent) contract law...the inversion of balance (offer) to choice (response) natural law.
That represents the choice to want (like) suggested information (ideals) by others; which are being held as idolized meaning within ones memory (mind). Responding to a memory filled with suggested information represents the ego.
"now" aka the moment(um) that is forever; "express" aka the temporary form expressing the ongoing flow, and "as they see fit" aka perceiving ALL perceivable through the lens of ONEs comprehension; shaped by free will of choice aka need (by perceived inspiration) or want (by suggested information).
Exchange the suggested label "time" with the perceived "movement" and it allows comprehension about a) each ONE (form) within ALL (flow) exists within movement, and b) the ONEness (energy) of ALL (flow/form) is moving. Movement doesn't require a label like "time" to communicate itself to those being moved within.
The relation of those within movement with the movement itself represents the self differentiation of velocity (flow) into resistance (form); which together represent momentum (balance in motion); while individually loss (flow) and growth (form) aka the internal power; balance; self sustenance of energy (the ONEness of ALL aka the generator for all regeneration within).
As for explaining this...comprehension represents the ONE seed within the soil of ALL perceived, and keeping comprehension/perception in resonance with balance requires the constant struggle of choice to adapt to perceived inspiration (need); while resisting suggested information (want). Falling for the latter causes the imbalance (want vs not want) within the ignored balance (need/want).
Lies (not want) represent the contradiction to a consented to truth (want) suggested beforehand. Just like non-believers (not want) are defined by the same suggestion as believers (want).
Consent (want or not want) to any suggested -ism causes the want versus not want conflict among those consenting; which in return gives those suggesting the sole power to define (suggestion); redefine (revisionism) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) the meaning of the suggested for all those who are reasoning (want vs not want) about it.
Truth vs false represents the redefinition of want vs not want. It's the same choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law underneath every conflict in this system; because this system implies perceived balance (offer) to choice (response) natural law.
Question the origin (suggestion) of your consented to "truth"; instead of fighting others over pointed out contradictions; which you perceive as lies. Try using implication (if/then) over reason (want vs not want aka true vs false aka believing vs not believing etc.) and you won't find yourself consenting to conflicts anymore.
a) nation - "a people" implies each perceivable "one" of them; while nothing suggests "no one" aka none; nothing; nothingness.
b) all existence implies ONEness of ALL and the ONEs within ALL.
c) yes vs no represents the rebranding of want (yes) vs not want (no).
d) the hebrew use of nothing from the Greek "ou oudeis" is for claims aka choice of want (suggested) over choice of need (perceived).
Ask yourself why you consent to everything suggested within the bible (want) ; while ignoring what the perceived (need) was shaped out of?
You chose to evaluate others as such; while using the suggested scripture as the justification for your choices. It's your free will of choice to do so. I'm inspired by the origin of the suggested "nothing" others use to justify the ignorance of perceived "everything".
Who suggested them "their" -isms and why are those who consent to believe or not believe what others suggest "claiming" it's theirs?
"patris et filii et spiritus sancti" (btw allegory for ALL; ONE, and ONEs adaptation to ALL) is being suggested "in nomine" aka in the name of others. Consenting to that doesn't make it your belief or philosophy; yet once again both believers and non-believers are claiming ownership over "their" point of views.