They basically gave 0 excuse for the "G" in that article, only that it could mean their boy "God," or it could mean their daughter Gigi, so basically that was 100% a Twatmason "G" no doubt
Charlie was another example of a "mid-level consciousness", which is the next level about the NPC. One of the fundamental characteristics of that level is that they lack an internal moral compass.
Now, it's not that they lack "morality", but morality is not quite what it is assumed to be. People would say that Charlie was a strong Christian. As a follower of the Christian moral code as it had been handed to him, he supported Israel. He was virtuous, in his own mind. He was also no dummy and could find no shortage of evidence to justify that position and did so for many years.
And that's the problem at the mid-level: the moral code is external. Pretty much everyone is smart enough to rationalize and justify any position of that moral code. Charlie somehow blotted out or necessitated or unfocused a plain genocide for years. It is a powerful facility of the human mind.
If you think of it like a funnel, yes, you can pour water through an upside-down funnel but it's very difficult and most of it's going to miss. It's very easy for mid-level consciousnesses to get it totally wrong in spite of the evidence. It's the internal moral compass that tells someone which way to orient the funnel for best results.
Another good example is Bill Maher. After years of vicious criticism, it's takes a personal visit and an evening with Trump before he comes to realize, "Hey, all I can say is that in person he's not like how everyone thinks he is from what is said about him on TV."
The subconscious mind builds tall and strong walls for the conscious mind.
You're too harsh on him. He was raised as an evangelical and this thing got drilled into his head. But he was beginning to question it in the past few months it seems. A lot of people testify to this. I believe he was on the path to truth and that he was decent. Explains why he got gunned down like that.
Well, I don't consider it harsh in the sense that I don't consider calling someone color-blind who cannot see all the usual frequencies of light. It's not a compliment, to be sure, but it doesn't do the individual any favors to ignore it, nor does it aid anyone trying to understand the situation. Few problems are remedied before there is at least some understanding.
But the "raised as an evangelical and this thing got drilled into his head" is quite at the heart of the necessary paradigm change. That applies to everyone in the human race. It's where they get their worldview and morality: from the "authorities".
About 80% are stuck there. Their worldview and morality will change only if the authorities they accept tell them so, or if those who they perceive as the authorities are changed.
For reference, this is why Trump is so focused on unity and maintaining a presence in mainstream media. To get the--let's say--30-40% entrained by progressive authorities to ever think or do something different, he himself has got to become the authority for them. And it's slow but it's working. That's why the Democrats are imploding.
Perhaps a further 15% can develop in time to the next higher level. There, you find Kirk, Maher, Tucker, Rogan, Ana Kasparian, Douglas Macgregor, and even Chris Cuomo. These are all smart people with all the access they want to information and to other smart people. They held firm view for years and years. They ended up changing some of them fundamentally, radically.
It's not clear what exactly triggers that reevaluation in them, but triggered it was. We will never know the trigger if we never study it, and we will never study it as long as the very paradigm is denied.
So the point is, none of this has anything to do with Kirk or Christianity or Zionism or Trump or Masonry or Da Jews anything like that. Those that seek to manipulate these things--the famous "They"--would very much prefer that the principles and mechanisms of human consciousness remain entirely unknown.
It is said that "knowledge is power" and this is it.
But the "raised as an evangelical and this thing got drilled into his head" is quite at the heart of the necessary paradigm change. That applies to everyone in the human race. It's where they get their worldview and morality: from the "authorities".
About 80% are stuck there. Their worldview and morality will change only if the authorities they accept tell them so, or if those who they perceive as the authorities are changed.
It's only bad if the authority is corrupted. God is the ultimate authority and His true historic Church is the authority here on Earth. The Church's teaching about the jews is unchanged for 2000 years and those who were raised within it and submitted to its authority, don't face the delusions of those outside of it (like evangelicals or unbelievers).
Yes, we need to put the correct authorities where they belong but that won't happen until people are willing to change themselves and repent first. I don't see this happening in our post-enlightenment freemasonic degenerate society. Society is too far gone, too prideful and spiritually deluded. It's all about getting to individual people who have an open heart to the truth.
I mean, I don't know what belief is correct, if any, but what I DO know is that a human being (assumed to be very similar to
you, or me, or Primate98) penned every single religious text. That is not very reassuring.
The funniest part of the whole "Blue beam" conspiracy to me is that it could be assumed that they will try to use Jesus as one of the entities to speak to people, right?
Here's how you will KNOW that the whole thing is a deception :
THEY WILL USE FICTIONAL (BY ALL ACCOUNTS) WHITE JESUS!
If they try to sell Jesus to me, he better look like a disheveled terrorist, not a member of Allman Brothers. Just saying.
You are smarter than an atheist, then. I believe Agnostics inherently are smarter than atheists because they are more open to God than them.
penned
Human also wrote your comment. The human called "you". A huge part of what you (or anyone, really) believe is creditable due to men. If everyone but you disappeared at age 5, what would your worldview be like??
Fallible human scientists interpret the unobservable unrepeatable past and make theories, but yet it is called "science" rather than history - and is supposedly "more" reliable??
The big difference is that GOD Inspired the Bible. That men wrote it is a moot point. Look at the results belief in the Bible has brought, for one. Look at all the true things it says.
not very reasoning
God wants us to be logical. See here: Isaiah 1:18 : "Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the LORD, “Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They will be like wool."
Matthew 23:37 : "And He said to him, “ ‘YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.’"
1 Peter 3:15 : "but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;"
blue beam
The devil hates Jesus and will even pretend to be God and some savior. The anti Christ will appeal to worldly desires, but leave your soul high and dry. He will be LOVED BY MOST OF HUMANITY. Evil does not come with horns. It comes to you in a suit and tie, offering you a bribe.
He will play nicey wicey with the world for the first half of his reign. Then he will go mask off and show his tyrannical, TRUE SELF in the 2nd half. If you live to witness those times, you WILL see "my" words come to pass because this info on the anti Christ are not originating from me, I am telling you stuff based from Revelation.
The ac hasn't arrived yet thankfully. In the meantime, we should be making the world Godlier and better.
And you will not get your "disheveled terrorist look", the anti Christ will almost certainly be seen as handsome. Definitely not physically ugly in most people's eyes.
To be frank, when you understand enough about what is really going on, you observe that almost everyone in the world draws a little circle around themselves. They call things within the circle "right" and things outside the circle "wrong". Of course, they never realize they have drawn the circle themselves, or that they adjust the lines from time to time.
When you're looking down at all these little Venn diagrams, you realize that the words "right" and "wrong" the way they are typically used have little applicability from that vantage. It's pointless to talk about.
If someone is looking down on these little Venn diagrams with you, well then, maybe there's something to discuss.
Well, just an an example of what I was talking about:
Suppose you went into a church--any church of your choosing--and handed out a simple 100-item multiple choice questionnaire to 100 different people regarding the tenets of "Christianity".
Unless you got back 100 identical answer sheets, then you'd have to say you had a problem even defining what "Christianity" was in the first place.
If you asserted that you or some other person was enough of an authority to decide how closely the questionnaires needed to match with less than 100% fidelity in order to define "Christianity", and which questionnaires did or not not satisfy that criteria, then "Christianity" would instantly be rendered an imperfect arbitrary human concept rather than a perfect absolute divine one. Then we'd also have to go back to how the questionnaire authorities were decided in the first place.
When someone could tell me the foregoing instead of me telling others, I would say that they had worked through numerous other issues for themselves and elevated their consciousness, and we were ready to proceed with the interchange.
Until such time, I would leave it to others to discuss the issues amongst themselves to see if they could elevate their consciousness and come to the realizations that I had, including that that discussion would never reach a conclusion and the true progression was to rise above it. It seems that in many centuries no such conclusion has been reached, so WTF does anyone want from me?
And if it strikes your mind that you find all this unsatisfactory and it's dodging the question or it's nonsensical or whatever else, yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying.
It's kinda strange that his wife was a freemason, don't ya think?
What proof of that do you have?
https://thetab.com/2025/09/16/people-think-theres-a-secret-meaning-behind-ring-erika-kirk-wore-in-video-with-charlies-body
They basically gave 0 excuse for the "G" in that article, only that it could mean their boy "God," or it could mean their daughter Gigi, so basically that was 100% a Twatmason "G" no doubt
Yes, G stands for the Grand Architect of the masonic luciferian religion. It's never used by Christians.
Charlie was another example of a "mid-level consciousness", which is the next level about the NPC. One of the fundamental characteristics of that level is that they lack an internal moral compass.
Now, it's not that they lack "morality", but morality is not quite what it is assumed to be. People would say that Charlie was a strong Christian. As a follower of the Christian moral code as it had been handed to him, he supported Israel. He was virtuous, in his own mind. He was also no dummy and could find no shortage of evidence to justify that position and did so for many years.
And that's the problem at the mid-level: the moral code is external. Pretty much everyone is smart enough to rationalize and justify any position of that moral code. Charlie somehow blotted out or necessitated or unfocused a plain genocide for years. It is a powerful facility of the human mind.
If you think of it like a funnel, yes, you can pour water through an upside-down funnel but it's very difficult and most of it's going to miss. It's very easy for mid-level consciousnesses to get it totally wrong in spite of the evidence. It's the internal moral compass that tells someone which way to orient the funnel for best results.
Another good example is Bill Maher. After years of vicious criticism, it's takes a personal visit and an evening with Trump before he comes to realize, "Hey, all I can say is that in person he's not like how everyone thinks he is from what is said about him on TV."
The subconscious mind builds tall and strong walls for the conscious mind.
You're too harsh on him. He was raised as an evangelical and this thing got drilled into his head. But he was beginning to question it in the past few months it seems. A lot of people testify to this. I believe he was on the path to truth and that he was decent. Explains why he got gunned down like that.
Well, I don't consider it harsh in the sense that I don't consider calling someone color-blind who cannot see all the usual frequencies of light. It's not a compliment, to be sure, but it doesn't do the individual any favors to ignore it, nor does it aid anyone trying to understand the situation. Few problems are remedied before there is at least some understanding.
But the "raised as an evangelical and this thing got drilled into his head" is quite at the heart of the necessary paradigm change. That applies to everyone in the human race. It's where they get their worldview and morality: from the "authorities".
About 80% are stuck there. Their worldview and morality will change only if the authorities they accept tell them so, or if those who they perceive as the authorities are changed.
For reference, this is why Trump is so focused on unity and maintaining a presence in mainstream media. To get the--let's say--30-40% entrained by progressive authorities to ever think or do something different, he himself has got to become the authority for them. And it's slow but it's working. That's why the Democrats are imploding.
Perhaps a further 15% can develop in time to the next higher level. There, you find Kirk, Maher, Tucker, Rogan, Ana Kasparian, Douglas Macgregor, and even Chris Cuomo. These are all smart people with all the access they want to information and to other smart people. They held firm view for years and years. They ended up changing some of them fundamentally, radically.
It's not clear what exactly triggers that reevaluation in them, but triggered it was. We will never know the trigger if we never study it, and we will never study it as long as the very paradigm is denied.
So the point is, none of this has anything to do with Kirk or Christianity or Zionism or Trump or Masonry or Da Jews anything like that. Those that seek to manipulate these things--the famous "They"--would very much prefer that the principles and mechanisms of human consciousness remain entirely unknown.
It is said that "knowledge is power" and this is it.
It's only bad if the authority is corrupted. God is the ultimate authority and His true historic Church is the authority here on Earth. The Church's teaching about the jews is unchanged for 2000 years and those who were raised within it and submitted to its authority, don't face the delusions of those outside of it (like evangelicals or unbelievers).
Yes, we need to put the correct authorities where they belong but that won't happen until people are willing to change themselves and repent first. I don't see this happening in our post-enlightenment freemasonic degenerate society. Society is too far gone, too prideful and spiritually deluded. It's all about getting to individual people who have an open heart to the truth.
Are you implying Christianity is false?
Are you implying it isn't?
I mean, I don't know what belief is correct, if any, but what I DO know is that a human being (assumed to be very similar to you, or me, or Primate98) penned every single religious text. That is not very reassuring.
The funniest part of the whole "Blue beam" conspiracy to me is that it could be assumed that they will try to use Jesus as one of the entities to speak to people, right?
Here's how you will KNOW that the whole thing is a deception :
THEY WILL USE FICTIONAL (BY ALL ACCOUNTS) WHITE JESUS!
If they try to sell Jesus to me, he better look like a disheveled terrorist, not a member of Allman Brothers. Just saying.
You are smarter than an atheist, then. I believe Agnostics inherently are smarter than atheists because they are more open to God than them.
Human also wrote your comment. The human called "you". A huge part of what you (or anyone, really) believe is creditable due to men. If everyone but you disappeared at age 5, what would your worldview be like??
Fallible human scientists interpret the unobservable unrepeatable past and make theories, but yet it is called "science" rather than history - and is supposedly "more" reliable??
The big difference is that GOD Inspired the Bible. That men wrote it is a moot point. Look at the results belief in the Bible has brought, for one. Look at all the true things it says.
God wants us to be logical. See here: Isaiah 1:18 : "Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the LORD, “Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They will be like wool."
Matthew 23:37 : "And He said to him, “ ‘YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.’"
1 Peter 3:15 : "but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;"
The devil hates Jesus and will even pretend to be God and some savior. The anti Christ will appeal to worldly desires, but leave your soul high and dry. He will be LOVED BY MOST OF HUMANITY. Evil does not come with horns. It comes to you in a suit and tie, offering you a bribe.
He will play nicey wicey with the world for the first half of his reign. Then he will go mask off and show his tyrannical, TRUE SELF in the 2nd half. If you live to witness those times, you WILL see "my" words come to pass because this info on the anti Christ are not originating from me, I am telling you stuff based from Revelation.
The ac hasn't arrived yet thankfully. In the meantime, we should be making the world Godlier and better.
And you will not get your "disheveled terrorist look", the anti Christ will almost certainly be seen as handsome. Definitely not physically ugly in most people's eyes.
To be frank, when you understand enough about what is really going on, you observe that almost everyone in the world draws a little circle around themselves. They call things within the circle "right" and things outside the circle "wrong". Of course, they never realize they have drawn the circle themselves, or that they adjust the lines from time to time.
When you're looking down at all these little Venn diagrams, you realize that the words "right" and "wrong" the way they are typically used have little applicability from that vantage. It's pointless to talk about.
If someone is looking down on these little Venn diagrams with you, well then, maybe there's something to discuss.
Intresting takes, but this doesn't really answer the question if you were implying Christianity was false. Stream of consciousness?
Well, just an an example of what I was talking about:
Suppose you went into a church--any church of your choosing--and handed out a simple 100-item multiple choice questionnaire to 100 different people regarding the tenets of "Christianity".
Unless you got back 100 identical answer sheets, then you'd have to say you had a problem even defining what "Christianity" was in the first place.
If you asserted that you or some other person was enough of an authority to decide how closely the questionnaires needed to match with less than 100% fidelity in order to define "Christianity", and which questionnaires did or not not satisfy that criteria, then "Christianity" would instantly be rendered an imperfect arbitrary human concept rather than a perfect absolute divine one. Then we'd also have to go back to how the questionnaire authorities were decided in the first place.
When someone could tell me the foregoing instead of me telling others, I would say that they had worked through numerous other issues for themselves and elevated their consciousness, and we were ready to proceed with the interchange.
Until such time, I would leave it to others to discuss the issues amongst themselves to see if they could elevate their consciousness and come to the realizations that I had, including that that discussion would never reach a conclusion and the true progression was to rise above it. It seems that in many centuries no such conclusion has been reached, so WTF does anyone want from me?
And if it strikes your mind that you find all this unsatisfactory and it's dodging the question or it's nonsensical or whatever else, yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying.