Reality of "God" . Responce post
(media.conspiracies.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (32)
sorted by:
be leerily of Freudian psychology. He was a fucking mess inside his own head and his work was all influenced by his own personal issues related to his mother.
Came here to say exactly this
The cocaine addiction didn't help.
cocaines a hellva drug
Logy (reasoning about suggested) tempts one to ignore psyche (animation of perceivable). Logy is utilized by few to distract many from psyche.
Freud/friend vs fiend implies logy/logic/reason...few suggest freudianism to tempt many to consent to a conflict of reason (friend vs fiend).
yeah he wasnt great but this resonates with me . what kinda god lets innocents get raped and murdered . would love a responce. If your baby got raped and shot in the head you are still cool with god?
Because there would be no freewill if he intervened. The image people have about God is probably not the right one. Perhaps this is in a way we cannot fathom the best of all worlds as Leibniz said or perhaps God is impartial where our souls are given free reign. Perhaps the same soul that would kill and do all that evil is the same soul being reincarnated into the victim.
But what I know for certain is that there is a form of justice regardless of your conception of God. Someone who commits wrong will have justice one way or another.
a) Add "of choice" to freewill and ask yourself if the origin of choice (balance) can intervene in the choices made within?
b) Few suggest "freewill" in return for consent by many. Consenting to a chosen ones suggestion tempts one to ignore ones choice.
Meanwhile in reality...IF free will of choice; THEN free within dominance; will/want within need; out of aka within, and choice within balance...only free will of choice can discern itself within origin.
Freewill as suggested aka "the capacity or ability to choose between different possible courses of action" tempts one to ignore different reactions (choice) within course (balance) of same action (motion).
a) Right/rego - "straight line" implies being (life) moved from inception towards death...that's ones right.
b) Right vs wrong implies a conflict of reason shaped by ones consent to suggested moralism by another. Reasoning against another corrupts ones discernment of self within a straight line aka ones right/rite of passage.
c) An image implies "artificial representation of natural origin". If one holds onto suggested information (artifice), while ignoring perceivable inspiration (natural), then an image aka imitation aka copy was made within ones mind/memory.
Sleight of hand: "It wasn't a lie...it was real in my imagination" ~Herman Rosenblat
Best of all tempts one to ignore BE (being) ST (standing firm) within ALL.
Sleight of hand: https://genius.com/Joe-esposito-youre-the-best-lyrics
God was whole before partials come to be within.
Soul/sole - "one and only"...there can be only one; one for all and all for one.
Few suggest pluralism (souls) and determinism (our) to tempt ONE to consent to another ONE, hence ignoring one and only for dual-ism.
a) RE (responding to) IN (being within) CARNA (flesh aka matter) TION (action aka motion).
b) Same motion (inception towards death) for each different reincarnated matter (life).
Being free will of choice within moving knowledge (perceivable inspiration) implies having the FREE will of choice to become uncertain by suggesting certainty, hence establishing a conflict of reason (affirm vs deny).
Knowledge (perceivable inspiration) doesn't require either affirmation, nor denial...understanding (suggested information) does.
One commits by consenting to suggested moralism, which then establishes a conflict of reason (right vs wrong)...within which one endlessly re-commits to a different side (or opinion) within the same conflict.
There can be only one way (inception towards death) for each one (life) within.
Sleight of hand: https://genius.com/Blondie-one-way-or-another-lyrics
You are thinking of the cartoonish sky god looking down at us. But god is incomprehensible.
a) Kinda/kind/kin - "class, sort, variety" implies partials within whole. Kinda (partial) God (whole) contradicts itself.
b) Let implies whole letting partials wield FREE will of choice to respond without interfering. Choice can only operate at center of balance (need/want). One needs to resist wanted temptations...
c) Innocence aka in (being within) nocere (harms way) implies being (life) within harms way (inception towards death).
Guilt/gieldan - "to pay for, debt" implies harming self by taking from another, while ignoring to be in nocere.
a) Implication (if/then) implies a moving origin...got/get (taking possession of) implies ones ignorance of being (life) within a moving (inception towards death) origin.
b) Baby/babylon/babel - "confusion; disorder" + bab (gate) ilu (god) are suggested deceptions to distract one from off-spring, which implies springing of origin into being, hence coming (inception towards death) towards being (life) aka already passing through the gate of god.
Blaming the origin of each ones free will of choice implies blasphemy and shirking response-ability. If choice goes against origin (balance); then choice imbalances itself.
not everyone who see creation believes we live under a graceful god. Personally i would argue that we have a impartial creator at best, and a malicious one at worst.