Oof... Salty loser... Spamming is not cool, mkay
(media.conspiracies.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (111)
sorted by:
Ever forwards implies ongoing motion...being implies temporal matter.
That implies transformation of partials within whole aka chemistry of all (alchemy). Shaping anything implies transforming aka alternation of differences within same source, which can be perceived...creating anything a) implies out of nothing and b) tempts one to ignore everything perceivable.
Suggested creationism also adds the creator, while transformation implies a flowing process aka male (motion) through female (momentum) transformation (matter)...hence being (life) implying a transfer (inception towards death).
Hue of man implies visible spectrum (momentum) of light (motion) for rays (matter) within. Branding oneself a human tempts one to ignore this process...a process inspiring self discernment.
Another branding issue...noun (rock) over verb (to rock). What does moving backward and forward imply? Alternation aka balancing as choice.
Few imbalance many with suggestion into circular reasoning...the suggested tempts one to incline towards sides, hence alternating, while circular logic/reasoning confines one within a ring. That process is hidden underneath the rhetoric ROCK & ROLL. There's way more geomancy at play about cutting corners and circling the square, but the gist of subversion (turning under) is rocking and rolling.
Flow forms...form struggles to sustain self within flow by resisting temptation. Resistance is fertile, hence can be grown. Wanting to holding onto formed growth implies the temptation one needs to resist.
Also...consenting to affirmation by another lowers ones resistance. Firming form together during flow burdens each ones resistance, while increasing the temptation to shirk response-ability to one another.
Notice how few tempt many to resist each other within conflicts of reason, which few hide under theaters of war...that's where "strength in numbers" originates from. Reasoning implies mutual destruction of resistance among many, which benefits a resisting few who sell temptations...
a) Origin implies an outpouring from, God implies a label upon...held within.
b) Consenting to a suggested label for origin permits another to speak in the name of (e nomine) of origin...hence contradicting perceivable origin with suggested labels.
c) Where does the call to label originate from? Perception or suggestion?
d) Notice Allah (phonetic; all law)...not a label, but an implication for each one within.
e) Notice God (phonetic, gad)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/gad#etymonline_v_1206 Doesn't following origin towards outcome imply "hurrying" along?
A pointed stick to drive oxen...aren't followers pointed towards outcomes? Doesn't consent stick to suggested information? Are the goys of this world not driven by progressivism? Look at what vaccines/vacca (cow) drove many to do to themselves and each other...
Sleight of hand for those with eyes to see: "olly olly oxen free"...a CATCH-phrase.
A secondary shaping tempting each other to ignore process of origin.
Form (temporary growth) within flow (ongoing loss) implies free to form within dominion of flow. Affirming each other tempts an exchange of dominion over each other, hence forms consensual submission to another form.
Form/firmus/dher - "to hold firmly"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/firm#etymonline_v_5968
Holding firmly doesn't sustain form within flow longer...it diminishes the resistance used to hold firm, which others tempt one to do by consenting to hold onto suggested information.
Can you show an example where ones denial of breathing let to ones death?
What sustains denial is ones resistance to hold onto a temptation, which ignores the force of velocity (inception towards death) diminishing resistance (life)...unless resisted.
Breathing implies a reaction, hence re-present (response to presented)...forever implies ongoing action, which generates re-actions.
Action implies process of dying; reacting implies living...life can only react, hence few suggesting many to react to "actors" being "directed".
Without differentiation through female (momentum) into trans-form (matter)...male (motion) couldn't be discerned by each different self as same origin.
Differences identifying (equalizing; making same) each other implies self denial aka lack of self discernment...out of which one labels all with identities.
Self implies perpetuation of one through intercourse with another one into off-spring...a setting apart by giving away. Not something to hold onto and identify with. It's ones claim of possession as "me; myself or I" which corrupts ones line of thought and thereby ones line of perpetuation through another.
In short: all doesn't require self, since there's no other "all"...one requires self, since there are other ones within all to perpetuate self.
Yes vs no reasoning about suggested tempts one to ignore perceivable. One does not perceive a conflict within nature unless one chooses a side within an artificial shape...for which one ignores nature.
For example...holding a hand before ones perceiving eyes to establish a suggested conflict of reason between light vs dark. Many lack to comprehend that holding onto suggested information (dark) conceals ones sight within perceivable inspiration (light)...and few keep adding layers of concealment onto walls of ignorance, held "firmly" within ones consenting mind/memory.
Does an outcome respond (re) to presented origin? What if a response (choice) can only operate in-between origin and outcome, hence from within a balance?
If there's only needed origin, then why would one require a choice to balance within wanted outcomes? Where's temptation without outcomes to tempt choice to fall for?
Does living represent (respond to presented) process of dying?
So that there can be growth (partial ones) during loss (whole oneness)...an internal balance of external energy.
That thoughts can be shaped "alike" if one consent to suggestions by others...which in return corrupts distinctions. Consent prevents one from distinguishing self....hence giving consent to another.
Redundancy of oneself when consenting to another, hence ignoring ones choice for a chosen ones suggestion. Origin simply generates more beings with the free will of choice to reduce themselves and each other...if they want to.
Free market capitalism...redundancy of products and consumers, hence wholesale through retail. Life just passing through, while chasing after death to get the next "stuff"...
a) Dying (loss/action) implies living (growth; reaction)...a simultaneous process of differentiation (matter) within origin (motion).
b) Suggested "become" inverts perceivable "coming into being"...no other being can share self discernment with one another.
c) Cease/cedere/ked - "to yield". This implies ones reaction to yield to action...not the ceasing of action or the coming into being of reactions.
Free form within dom-inating flow aka free resistance within dominating velocity.
Few suggest freedom (free and dom put together) to distract many from the ongoing differentiation of dominance (balance) into free (choice), and more importantly each ones discernment of self as wielding FREE will of choice.
Consenting to suggested "freedom" permits others to offer "liberty" to those worthy thereof (willing slaves)...and just like that...international prison-industrial complex.
Another example...suggested "land of the free" tempts one to ignore being free within the land of dominance. This distinction can only be made through self discernment.
Flow to form transformation (inception to life) + form to flow transformation (life to death). Transformation implies passing matter through momentum of motion.
The "gates" of inception and death imply matter coming in and out of motion, while being passed through momentum.
Look at a sinus curvature...inception and death are visible from outside. Now notice baseline continuing through one temporary sinus curvature after another...base implies the origin oneness aka all aka whole aka sound aka light aka energy etc.
There can be only one...one ongoing whole; each temporary one within.
From another angle of perspective...death tempting one to be afraid of loosing life. The issue...only during loss (inception towards death) can growth (life) have a perspective of what loosing feels like.
In short...death makes each partial whole again.
"you may call" contradicts inspiring adaption to God's breath of life, because it tempts ones consent to another one.
All inspires each one apart from one another...information tempts one to consent to others, hence coming together.
If one chooses to be inspired...agreeing or disagreeing with another tempts one to ignore that.
a) Not death (noun)...dying (adjective), which implies to live (verb).
b) One struggles/resists/suffers origin...YET...can freely choose to turn ones perspective within perceivable origin (need) towards suggested outcomes (want).
That's why the "call of duty" tempts many to march towards destruction, hence into war.
The issue is "thinking", hence revolving suggested information within ones consenting mind/memory. Perceivable inspiration moves through ones mind/memory and cannot be held onto, hence most artists complaining about loosing inspiration.
Ever forwards (for ever) generates odd adaptations, hence adapting "backwards" to incoming origin.
If one moves ever forwards, then what would one react to? Moving forwards implies the path of least resistance, hence lessening of adaption by letting form get flown away.
Notice that the end of the "nothing pitch" shows Seinfeld falling for the temptation to ignore further resistance.
Sound implies entire...free will of choice implies each partial ones reaction within entire action. Suggested pluralism (we) collectivizes each into many...under few "chosen ones".
A "call" shapes suggested information, which tempts others to ignore perceivable inspiration. Inspiration doesn't call...all flows for one to draw from.
Ever forwards (motion) temporal (matter)...
Rhetoric/rethorike (art of influencing) from were (to speak) tempts form to turn within flow, hence from resistance into velocity. That's why rhetorical suggestion is used to invert directed perception.
Responsible.
Then, Origin.
Jesus Christ.
Then, All shows All (Him). What is "each different self"?
Then, how could one perceive death coming out?
Who requires or wants? Does resistance process life?
Does each one cease? Then, all would be lost.
What else?
Then, the dying process represents transformation. How could a dying outcome represent or perceptibly come out?
Then, flow and resist, free and dominated.
What if loss of form is partial? One could die forever.
Perceptive. Dying forever and ever ....
Then, for ever, and ever (back).
Accepting death by the hands of others doesn't quite trigger the "will over respiration" achievement...
To show implies to perceive, hence by one within all. All cannot perceive all, because perception implies differentiation of all into ones.
Temporal within ongoing passing through one another aka sprouting/germination/offspring...
What comes out of the process of dying? Each living one coming to be within. All perceivable implies "input" coming out of process of dying; each ones perception implies living within.
a) One who needs wants to ignore it.
b) One who responds to seeking (re-quire) aims at suggested outcomes, while ignoring perceivable FOUNDation, hence "seek an you shall find".
Living implies resisting the process of dying, which tempts one to ignore resisting. Resistance implies ones re-sponding stance within velocity as choice within balance.
a) Loss generates growth ; growth re-generates during loss.
b) Motion (all) utilizes momentum to generate matter (one)...only matter coming to be within momentum experiences growth (living) during loss (dying).
c) All implies generation of loss (action) and growth (reactions) internally. Only growth experiences loss.
d) Where would all lose ones to? Only ones can lose themselves within all.
e) All would be contradicts one being will.
Utilizing guide to grow life, while others chase after death. To guide implies to direct...nature directs being; being reacts (life) to direction (inception towards death) by resisting the temptation thereof.
...of living.
a) Because each one comes out alive into the process of dying, before being moved back into it...
b) Having perception implies that one came out of perceivable...circumference (motion) generates center (matter).
Form resisting dominating flow by free will of choice.
If loss of form is partial, then WHOLE could grow...which contradicts whole. This line of thinking is based on ones consent to creationism, which suggests the whole creation and then some aka one creator added to all creation.
In reality...ONEs addition (inception); subtraction (death); multiplication (intercourse for off-spring) and division (whole into partials) can only operate within ALL.
Each temporary one dies within ever forwarding all.
That implies multiplying "ongoing", while ignoring that only temporal can be multiplied within ongoing by division.
In that line of thinking...addition (living) during subtraction (dying).
Just because perceivable implies dying, doesn't mean that ones living perception has to ignore itself for it.
Temporal matter forwards and back (choice) within momentum (balance) of ongoing motion.
Spirit, into your (All) hands.
Which self is first (original)?
Then, process of dying, (towards) to death, forever and ever back.
Then, forever and ever back.
Responsible.
Reality: Form within flow (parts) represent whole. Loss acts/subtracts (to flow) and growth reacts/adds (from flow) upon parts within whole (all).
If each temporary one within, then each one contemporary (con-tempo): forever and ever back. Suggesting each one dies ignores spirit returning (turning fro and back). Forever and ever back implies multiplying tempo both forward and back (within ongoing by division between forward and back).
Then, dying implies living: discerning self ....
All through spirit into one...
a) All implies first; each one implies second/seco - "to divide"
b) All implies first (inception) and last (death) for each one (life) within.
Forever and ever implies multiplying forward; while back implies a division...a contradiction.
In reality...forwards (motion) and backwards (matter) are balanced (momentum). The position of being implies backwards within forwarding origin.
If "forever and ever back"; then no forwarding of temporal being.
Aka reaction (re) enabled (ible) by sponsoring (spons) action.
CON (together) contradicts ONE (apart from one another).
a) Suggestion tempts one to ignore by consent. Few are suggesting to gain consent by many aka the allegory of the vampire asking for permission to enter.
To ask another implies the temptation to ignore perceivable all for a suggestion by another one...that requires resistance.
b) Inception implies death for ones perceiving life, because all perceivable moves, hence directing input through one, which diminishes ones resistance through velocity.
Spirit doesn't respond to a turn; ones response implies the turn within directed spirit, and as a reacting choice within an enacting balance, one struggles fro and back to sustain self.
Few are tempting many with suggested spiritualism to consent and hold onto "spirit" as a possession, all while ignoring that breathing implies the need to let go.
a) Implication (if/then) requires the same velocity so that different resistances within can utilize it to discern self.
b) If all is one in energy, then multiplication can only happen after the division of all (whole) into ones (partials), because only then can intercourse for off-spring multiply being.
c) Tempo/temporal/ten - "to stretch" implies ones free will of choice to balance (increase/reduce) different forms of resistance during the same flow of velocity.
Only within the momentum of motion can matter stretch...stretching partials cannot increase or decrease whole.
...if one chooses to discern self by adapting to perceivable, while resisting consent to suggested.