Answer ANY of my (or our) qestions, rebut ANY of my rebuttals, cite ANY sources of his claims, defend ANY of his assertions when questioned. Basically he is like a DEMOCRAT: Make claims and double down instead of supporting.
If this guy can question God's Word, I can certainly question his STRANGE TEACHINGS.
Address the facts, LBF. Do your ideas stand a chance???
The word 'word' isn't a verb. Dis-tinction is needed to de-fine the point. Like the word 'life'. If you see life as inception towards death, death is your goal. All movement can be seen as 'movement towards non-movement' in that regard, which is non-sense. Movement isn't a thing, it's a condition or state of a thing. Death would be lack of the condition of life by the same regard. Spirit is reduced when formulated into a letter and then words. Are you aware of how this was done to exhibit the gematria within all alphabets?
https://kupdf.net/download/jesus-christ-sun-of-god-ancient-cosmology-and-early-christian-symbolism-by-david-r-fideler-ocr_58a100e36454a7335db1eb87_pdf
This should become your new point of reference when de-coding words. . You're un-needed to this anon. You do, however, serve a purpose, so as usual, I will not downvote the 'wordy' explanations as they most are always half and materially accurate but dualisticly contrarian in nature, leading to more questions, as there are no 'definitive' answers due to their dualistic nature on the material plane.
Word
The word "verb" implies "word"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/verb
It does, doesn't it. But it isn't one. Did that solve anything?
The word 'imply', implies that there is a deeper connection left unsaid. That's the shortcoming of words.
Word implies verb. Verb implies word. Welcome to dualism as explanation.
There were no words before mouths to express, yet it is said that in the beginning was The Word. Logos as the spirit from which all words as lesser formulai....sephira...are formulated. This breaks its truth into parts to re-member. All would do well to learn how to count and spell, as this was never taught in schools. Learning this would eliminate the guesswork and error.
What does mainstream education teach about a verb? That it denotes "action".
What you are describing (is vs isn't) represents reactions turning against one another, while ignoring that action moves straight into reaction aka from cause into effect aka from flow into form aka from all into one.
Action implies the ongoing solution dissolving any temporary reaction within. Nature dissolves any is vs isn't conflict within by limiting each being (life) in-between boundaries (inception towards death).
You say "it isn't one", but all implies oneness (cause) for each one (effect) within. Sound implies sanus/entire/whole/all aka oneness for each one within. It's the words used to describe this which tempts one to ignore singularity for plurality, which is why each singular word is shaped by many letters.
If/then implies a separation during motion aka analysis...not a connection aka synthesis. Your consent to the suggested word "imply" implies a synthesis tempting you to ignore analysis.
As free will of choice one needs to analyze im-plica-tion (within fold of action) to discern self as reaction within fold of action. Fold implies "to bend"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/fold as in a straight line (inception towards death) bending (life).
As for leaving unsaid...sound doesn't say anything; it internally separates instruments from one another, thereby giving the opportunity to form speech during flowing sound.
A letter is shorter than any word, and only within sound can a word come into being.
TO dualism implies from one towards two. TO implies the origin of one aka from all motion into each unit of matter...only afterwards can units of matter be put together into two.
A chosen one suggests one's choice to give consent to an -ism, which when given, implies a dual-ism, since it synthesizes ONES choice and a chosen ONES suggestion.
If sound; then each instrument within...that's how singularity works. If an instrument ignores sound for another instrument's words, then a dualism was shaped within the singularity of sound.
a) Why do you put NO before the "word" of God? If God implies everything; then nothing (no) implies ones denial of everything.
b) Expression implies pressing outwards (ex-press) from within action (ion), hence sound allowing each instrument within to express outwards whatever noise one chooses to shape.
c) If there; then here...both imply from the perspective of one within all.
Motion (sound) > momentum (spirit) > matter (instrument)...words are exchanged by matter to distract from the momentum of motion. Words let (hence letters) others breathe spirit into one...which isn't the animating spirit (living), but the ghostly spirit (dying).
Holding onto words tempts one to ignore that sound moves through one, hence animating (motion) the spirit (momentum) of being (matter).
a) Sephira/sepiroth/sefirot aka the ein-sof (endless one) of jewish mysticism... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sefirot
The trick...suggesting the sof/soph (knowledge aka all perceivable) tempts ones perception to ignore all perceivable for the suggested. A jew formulates "knowledge" within a gentiles mind, while calling it "understanding", hence tricking one to give consent to a suggestion.
The formula used implies spell-craft (words shaped within sound) and mercantile magic aka selling (to suggest) and buying (to consent). Nature sets each being free (choice)...buying and selling tempts ones free will of chocie to sell itself out by buying into a chosen ones offer.
And yet truth is being held onto while fighting lies. A synthesis conflicting with analysis, hence a "world of lies".
a) If God implies one, then two implies...more than God; double God? What about zero aka less or no God? How can one count without denying that there can be only one?
b) Consenting to a spell...spellbinds ones free will of choice.
Where's the guesswork and error for form (life) within flow (inception towards death)? What if flow amends any error form shapes? What if work continues (flow) to discontinue each employee (form)?
What if that which sets simultaneously eliminates aka what if the setting (inception) of being (life) implies elimination (death)?
I could respond with more words to counter your words, huh?
Now do 'The ineffability that is Zen'.
Are you able to shut the words off? Why not?
No, don't answer.