c) any suggestion represents the temptation for one to ignore perceivable
d) consenting to anything suggested deceives oneself into ignoring perceivable.
e) DECEPT (misleading) -ATION (through action) implies the reaction (living) being tempted by the enacting (process of dying) to ignore resisting.
f) the few aren't the deceivers; but the suggester of temptations. The only deceiver represents the one consenting to the suggested temptation.
Going from the heliocentric bullshit to proclaiming flat earth from the rooftops doesn't change the dynamic being exploited here, it just keeps the cattle within the pen of reasoning over suggested.
The perceivable doesn't need to be defined (it represents predefined inspiration); the perceiving need to grow their comprehension; while resisting what others are suggesting.
The suggestion "this world is..." tempts one to ignore that it was perceivable before one could make a suggestion about it.
a) CRAZY, adjective - "broken". The partial (perceiving) within the whole (perceivable) implies a broken state, hence the opportunity for oneself to grow; to stabilize; to fix temporarily.
b) "I am nothing" implies one being defined by the suggested "nothing" from others.
c) "I am" tempts one to ignore that one was; before being able to suggest to others that "I am..."
Sleight of hand: "I am whatever you say I am; cause if I wasn't; then why would I say I am?"
d) if others think you're crazy; then you're crazy to them and they will behave as if you were crazy. It's the suggested label "crazy" which allows the suggesting 3rd party to tempt conflicts among those who consent to it by either wanting or not wanting the label "crazy".
i only proclaim from this site. not the rooftops
The world wide web reaches more than any rooftop...
you would get ostracized
The few suggest ostracism to tempt them many to fear banishment; which tempts them to ignore that the perceiving mind is already bound to the natural order of the perceivable.
The center of everything cannot be exiled; yet it can be tempted to ignore expression; by consenting to be repressed through the suggestion of others.
the more i try to help, the more they close off into their programming
Your suggested help contradicts them already consenting to other suggestions. They are bound by choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law to the will of others; and you're breaching that contract. They lack comprehension about that contract; yet view any suggested contradiction as a conflict.
Underneath that; they willingly ignore perceivable for suggested; and your suggested contradiction challenges their ignorance; their will; their shirking of response-ability (choice).
its amazing how stubborn people are
If one exists as perceiving choice within perceivable balance, then one also has the choice to ignore (want) all perceivable (need). Even breathing is being ignored; hence allowing the few to suggest spiritual warfare (put a mask over your mouth and nose) after also suggesting the sleight of hand (I can't breathe...leads to death).
do you get paid for replies?
Nah; that would contradict free-will-of-choice. Would be nice tho; then again...growing evaluation by growing comprehension represents more than enough compensation.
Only works if adapting to inspiration for the sustenance of self...not for others. If others utilize it as inspiration; then that represents their free will of choice.
Writing for others implies one seeking first confirmation; then validation by others. Neither is needed for the sustenance of self. Every choice will have consequences, and growing choice allows more comprehension about perceivable consequences.
a) to know implies to perceive
b) all -isms represent suggestions
c) any suggestion represents the temptation for one to ignore perceivable
d) consenting to anything suggested deceives oneself into ignoring perceivable.
e) DECEPT (misleading) -ATION (through action) implies the reaction (living) being tempted by the enacting (process of dying) to ignore resisting.
f) the few aren't the deceivers; but the suggester of temptations. The only deceiver represents the one consenting to the suggested temptation.
Going from the heliocentric bullshit to proclaiming flat earth from the rooftops doesn't change the dynamic being exploited here, it just keeps the cattle within the pen of reasoning over suggested.
The perceivable doesn't need to be defined (it represents predefined inspiration); the perceiving need to grow their comprehension; while resisting what others are suggesting.
The suggestion "this world is..." tempts one to ignore that it was perceivable before one could make a suggestion about it.
a) CRAZY, adjective - "broken". The partial (perceiving) within the whole (perceivable) implies a broken state, hence the opportunity for oneself to grow; to stabilize; to fix temporarily.
b) "I am nothing" implies one being defined by the suggested "nothing" from others.
c) "I am" tempts one to ignore that one was; before being able to suggest to others that "I am..."
Sleight of hand: "I am whatever you say I am; cause if I wasn't; then why would I say I am?"
d) if others think you're crazy; then you're crazy to them and they will behave as if you were crazy. It's the suggested label "crazy" which allows the suggesting 3rd party to tempt conflicts among those who consent to it by either wanting or not wanting the label "crazy".
The world wide web reaches more than any rooftop...
The few suggest ostracism to tempt them many to fear banishment; which tempts them to ignore that the perceiving mind is already bound to the natural order of the perceivable.
The center of everything cannot be exiled; yet it can be tempted to ignore expression; by consenting to be repressed through the suggestion of others.
Your suggested help contradicts them already consenting to other suggestions. They are bound by choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law to the will of others; and you're breaching that contract. They lack comprehension about that contract; yet view any suggested contradiction as a conflict.
Underneath that; they willingly ignore perceivable for suggested; and your suggested contradiction challenges their ignorance; their will; their shirking of response-ability (choice).
If one exists as perceiving choice within perceivable balance, then one also has the choice to ignore (want) all perceivable (need). Even breathing is being ignored; hence allowing the few to suggest spiritual warfare (put a mask over your mouth and nose) after also suggesting the sleight of hand (I can't breathe...leads to death).
Nah; that would contradict free-will-of-choice. Would be nice tho; then again...growing evaluation by growing comprehension represents more than enough compensation.
Only works if adapting to inspiration for the sustenance of self...not for others. If others utilize it as inspiration; then that represents their free will of choice.
Writing for others implies one seeking first confirmation; then validation by others. Neither is needed for the sustenance of self. Every choice will have consequences, and growing choice allows more comprehension about perceivable consequences.