Since you were exposed as a Qultist with your very first post, have you just given up on trying to hide, jew?
Would you really be able to recognize Jesus when he returns?
He has AB- blood. We’re pretty sure about that.
So hasn't technology already presented its first major challenge to Christianity by upending the entire narration of the Bible which claims that Jesus was biologically closest in relation to the DNA configuration of Mary and her family line?
No.
Jesus was the only time when the actual g-d of the… …Muslims…
Uh…
obviously the choice of body taken by g-d must matter in the grand scheme of things
Right, the Old Testament has information on that.
So if we Christians
Don’t even try it, converso shapeshifter.
Is it safe to assume that “Son of God” and the Trinity was more a metaphoric puzzle to solve, rather than a declaration that “master race” exists on earth and will be confirmed/revealed?
a) manifestation implies from immaterial (action) into material (reaction).
b) action (balance) generates reaction (choice) through motion. Balance within motion represents momentum. Reaction (life) within momentum of action (inception towards death) perceives this as the ever changing "moment".
c) ask yourself what the whole would use choice for? The partial (matter) on the other hand requires choice to balance within the momentum of the whole (immaterial).
is not know
a) KNOWL'EDGE, noun - "perception of that which exists". What if everything is knowledge, while everyone within has the opportunity to grow comprehension about knowledge by adapting to it?
If god represents everything, why would one attach nothing (is not) to the perceivable knowledge from everything?
b) what if one is tempted to suggest to others what "is", while ignoring to adapt to everything perceivable that was, before one came to be?
Everything g-d does has a purpose
PUR'POSE, noun [Latin propositum, propono; pro, before, and pono, to set or place.]...purpose implies before one was set into it. Others suggest one that purpose represents wanted outcomes, which tempts one to ignore to adapt to perceivable origin.
If one represents reaction (life) within enacting (inception towards death), then reacting (perceiving) to enacted (perceivable) represents ones purpose...not consenting to suggested outcomes by others.
what is the purpose of choosing a particular
To be a particular within whole implies having free will of choice to react to the enacting whole.
race
RACE, noun [Latin radix; radius; ray, radiate etc.] implies ones growth (living) within loss (process of dying) aka the fruits of ones labors.
particular race
The growth of a partial within whole is based on ones struggle to sustain apartheid (living) within wholeness (process of dying). Others suggest one to come together, hence weakening ones resistance.
many different races
Consider if everything perceivable represents a different part of the whole, then consider if others suggest sameness to tempt one to ignore differences? Consider further if whole dividing into partial could generate moving differences, which those within perceive as inspiration for adaptation. If everything looks the same...why would life struggle to sustain itself within the process of dying? Yet if everything is different, then life gets constantly inspired to adapt, to react, to make choices, to experience different consequences from different choices.
Conscious awareness and self discernment require perceivable differences, yet can be corrupted with suggested likeness and sameness into ignorance.
competing for
If life is being moved FORwards from inception towards death, then why would one consent to compete "for" instead of struggling within to sustain self?
for dominance
If choice can only exist within balance, then what if "free" will of choice exists within the "dom" inance of balance aka free-dom? Could others choose to tempt choice to compete against each other for dominance, as to distract them from being choice (living) within dominance (process of dying)?
Since you were exposed as a Qultist with your very first post, have you just given up on trying to hide, jew?
He has AB- blood. We’re pretty sure about that.
No.
Uh…
Right, the Old Testament has information on that.
Don’t even try it, converso shapeshifter.
Probably.
Off yourself. You’re incapable of fitting in here. You’re fooling no one.
Q-LARP’s glove has seventeen fingers, half of which are unfinished, and no place for the hand to enter.
Damn, that would’ve been a good joke, wouldn’t it…
Christ is not God. He is the son of God
What difference does it make? go home rabbi
a) why use a partial (white) to describe the whole (god)?
b) what about graven images?
a) manifestation implies from immaterial (action) into material (reaction).
b) action (balance) generates reaction (choice) through motion. Balance within motion represents momentum. Reaction (life) within momentum of action (inception towards death) perceives this as the ever changing "moment".
c) ask yourself what the whole would use choice for? The partial (matter) on the other hand requires choice to balance within the momentum of the whole (immaterial).
a) KNOWL'EDGE, noun - "perception of that which exists". What if everything is knowledge, while everyone within has the opportunity to grow comprehension about knowledge by adapting to it?
If god represents everything, why would one attach nothing (is not) to the perceivable knowledge from everything?
b) what if one is tempted to suggest to others what "is", while ignoring to adapt to everything perceivable that was, before one came to be?
PUR'POSE, noun [Latin propositum, propono; pro, before, and pono, to set or place.]...purpose implies before one was set into it. Others suggest one that purpose represents wanted outcomes, which tempts one to ignore to adapt to perceivable origin.
If one represents reaction (life) within enacting (inception towards death), then reacting (perceiving) to enacted (perceivable) represents ones purpose...not consenting to suggested outcomes by others.
To be a particular within whole implies having free will of choice to react to the enacting whole.
RACE, noun [Latin radix; radius; ray, radiate etc.] implies ones growth (living) within loss (process of dying) aka the fruits of ones labors.
The growth of a partial within whole is based on ones struggle to sustain apartheid (living) within wholeness (process of dying). Others suggest one to come together, hence weakening ones resistance.
Consider if everything perceivable represents a different part of the whole, then consider if others suggest sameness to tempt one to ignore differences? Consider further if whole dividing into partial could generate moving differences, which those within perceive as inspiration for adaptation. If everything looks the same...why would life struggle to sustain itself within the process of dying? Yet if everything is different, then life gets constantly inspired to adapt, to react, to make choices, to experience different consequences from different choices.
Conscious awareness and self discernment require perceivable differences, yet can be corrupted with suggested likeness and sameness into ignorance.
If life is being moved FORwards from inception towards death, then why would one consent to compete "for" instead of struggling within to sustain self?
If choice can only exist within balance, then what if "free" will of choice exists within the "dom" inance of balance aka free-dom? Could others choose to tempt choice to compete against each other for dominance, as to distract them from being choice (living) within dominance (process of dying)?