boring after few hundreds of years
If one were to be immortal; then why would one keep measuring time? Furthermore...what happens if a mortal resists keeping measure of time?
information overload
Loading implies ones consent to mentally hold onto suggested information by another. One cannot overload on perceivable inspiration since one cannot hold onto it.
reached a point
a) A sentence (life) cannot reach a point (death) without perishing...
b) REACH, verb - "to make straight"...reach (inception towards death) generates departure (life).
point of living
Living implies sentenced from inception towards point of death. Few suggest progressivism towards points to tempt many to ignore sentence/sense/perception within perceivable origin.
Point implies "end of sentence"...
reality of positive and negative
Hold your breath...can you negate the need to breathe? What if negation implies ones de-nial of position?
What if few suggest a conflict of reason (positive vs negative) to distract one from being able to negate ones position through ignorance?
zero energy
Zero/cifre/cipher aka arithmetic/arithmos/tell-craft/numerology etc. tempts ONE to ignore that all is ONE in energy.
Sleight of hand: "there can be only one" + "all for one and one for all" + "alone" aka ALL(in)ONE.
Here's a test...if EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power" implies one; then what's two? How could one double internal power of external energy?
paradox
Aka para/per (forwards) and dox/dek (to take). Few suggest doxology (taking speech) to tempt many to consent to progressivism, hence taking that which moves forwards (inception towards death), while ignoring to resist (life).
Dox contradicts para...matter cannot hold onto motion without destroying itself.
The idea of a God often doesn't add up
Suggested idealism tempts one to hold onto, while ignoring that addition (inception) and subtraction (death) of being (life) cannot be held onto.
look at the universe
a) To look at implies to lock onto aka to focus on...while ignoring that ones sight (perception) implies within the movement of all perceivable.
b) Universe implies turning (vertere) one (unus). Few suggest universe to turn many from perceivable origin towards suggested outcomes.
created everything
Creation implies out of nothing. Everything implies each thing (partials) within everything (whole) aka transmutation within everything.
Suggested creationism tempts one to ignore perceivable transmutation of motion through momentum (inception towards death) into matter (life).
Here's a test...create anything suggestible without using everything perceivable to "create".
One cannot perceive creation, because all perceivable existed before ones perception came to be.
all life could coexist peacefully
a) Living implies one (partial); dying implies all (whole)...only within loss (inception towards death) can there be growth (life).
b) -ist (coexist) implies ones consent to suggested -ism (co-existentialism) aka ones submission of self into bondage to another aka religion (Latin religio) - "to bind anew".
c) CO (together; with) contradicts EX (expression) because expressions put together repress each other.
Sleight of hand: "Express yourself; don't repress yourself...and I'm not sorry...it's human nature"
d) Peace/piece implies being apart from one another as partials within whole. Few trick many to ignore that by tempting them into a perpetual conflict of reason (peace vs war), while ignoring that reason is the foundation for all conflicts and wanting to come together in "peace" contradicts nature differentiating pieces by setting each one apart from one another.
We see a world driven by competition
Competition implies ones consent to take a suggested side within a conflict of reason against another...which tempts one to ignore being (life) driven (inception towards death) apart from one another.
our understanding
a) How could it be ours if we "stand under" others?
Are many students stand under few teachers? What about many followers standing under few leaders or many slaves standing under few masters?
b) What if suggested pluralism (our, we) tempts singular (one) to ignore self discernment?
less centered around human beliefs.
Being implies center (perception) of circumference (perceivable)...believing implies ones consent to the suggestion of another.
To believe tempts "being to leave" ones position at center, while inclining outwards. How does one belief? By free will of choice. What does choice imply? Center of balance. What does choice at center of balance choosing to incline outwards towards "chosen ones" suggestions imply? Imbalance!
so many rules
Rule/reg - "to move in a straight line"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/rule#etymonline_v_16625
There's only one rule (inception towards death) for each one within (life). Ignoring oneself for another establishes many under ever increasing rules by few.
Christians and Muslims are culturally incompatible
a) Both consented to suggested abrahamism aka abh (father) raham (multitude). They are being cultivated by mixing to equalize natural differences.
b) Reason makes both sides of every conflict compatible to each other. One cannot reason "for" without establishing an "against".
c) As for the natural foundation...christ implies one who's been set free; while muslim implies one who submits to bondage. Both imply ones free will of choice within a balance based system.
countries jews run
a) Nature runs (inception towards death) natives (life)...suggested progressivism tempts natives to run along with nature instead of resisting.
b) A jew suggests gentiles to count..gentile consent establishes a jew as the account. To count implies "to sum up, reckon together" which tempts one to ignore that nature sets units apart from one another.
the rulers than embed either in each other's countries.
It's the few who are embedded at the center of surrounding matter...a surrounding established by many reasoning against each other in the shape of ouroboros.
Nothing about any election is honest any more
Free will of choice hONEs ones elective response-ability...selecting others puts one against others aka dis-one.
How dishonest to self is it to elect another as ones representative?
Single; tho...one cannot pass over from one state into another without being set apart from one another. Hence pass/pete - "to spread"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/pass#etymonline_v_7277
We/vedu/ve - "we two"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/we#etymonline_v_4866 That implies suggested dualism tempting each consenting singular to ignore oneself for another.
God's Spirit breathed life into me
Aka God's (motion) Spirit (momentum) breathed life (matter) into me.
I live because He died
Not "died"...living (matter) within process (momentum) of dying (motion).
God cannot die. For each living Christ within...God implies dying. For each temporary matter; all ongoing motion implies extinction.
Only within extinction (inception towards death) can there be origination (life) aka only within loss can there be growth aka only within action can there be reactions aka only within order can there be chaos etc.
resurrected into new life
a) Suggested "new" tempts one to ignore perceivable "now".
b) For matter..."now" implies the perceivable momentum of ongoing motion, within which temporary matter continuously comes into (inception) and gets moved out of (death) being (life).
c) Resurrect aka re (response to) surgere (to rise) implies ones free will of choice as risen (life) during fall (inception towards death).
The trick underneath the "Resurrection of Christ" is to make it about another instead of each one coming into being by unction/anointing/messiah/mashah.
The Christ had to be nailed to the cross to distract from being (life) moved aCROSS (inception towards death). Coming into being implies the act of christening.
He takes me with Him.
He gives (inception) being within (life) while taking (death)...
a) Corruptible mortal (life) with-IN IN-corruptible IM-mortality (inception towards death).
b) Why does that which is set free (life) needs to cover itself from that which sets free (inception towards death)?
Why the clothes when one comes in naked and goes out naked?
Death, where is your victory?
The ongoing process of dying isn't on a conquest towards victory; it generates each life as a temporal hero's journey of valor.
VAL'OR, noun (Latin valor; valeo, to be strong, to be worth) - "strength of mind in regard to danger; that quality which enables a man to encounter danger with firmness"...seeking victory tempts one to spend valor.
Death, where is your sting?"
Life, does it sting if you ignore breathing; drinking and eating? Ignorance makes one stingy...
nowhere near an election
Elect implies being choice within balance; select implies choosing to ignore perceivable balance for suggested choices, which then imbalances self.
What could be nearer than ones choice and what could be farther than all to choose from?
they
a) Can you explain plural of energy? If THE energy, then what is THEY energy?
b) Plural/pluralis/pluris/plus - "more". How could there be more than ALL for each singular one within?
Could it be that one can be tempted to ignore all (perceivable) for more (suggested)?
-ist (scientist) implies ones consent to suggested -ism (scientism). Those who suggest -isms gain remote control over those who consent to be -ists.
Few suggest; many consent to follow suggested...that implies remote aka response to (re) distant in place (mote). Perceivable inspiration moves through ones perception, while suggested information has to be taken remotely from the distance of another.
I don't think the church or Holy Spirit leave
a) Holy/whole for each partial within spirit/spiro - "to breathe".
b) Church/circe/kirika/keue - "to swell" aka swelling (inception) and waning (death) of each anointed one coming into life within.
c) Ones leave (life) of absence (inception towards death), while being carried into presence.
d) Choosing to take possession of oneself as "I" contradicts holy spirit, and doing nothing (don't) contradicts church...only within everything can each thing swell, and only while letting go can potential increase.
Jesus comes back
a) Christ (to anoint) implies each off-spring coming "back" from origin into being...Jesus (to save) tempts one to ignore that being (life) within origin (inception towards death) cannot be saved...only sustained temporarily before going "back" to origin.
In short...Jesus (to hold onto) contradicts Christ (to give away).
b) Save/salvus/sol - "whole"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/save#etymonline_v_22794
Opposite of save implies harm, hence coming to be within (life) harms way (inception towards death).
Still God
a) All moves; each one within is being (life) moved (inception towards death)
b) God/ghut/gheu - "to invoke" aka in (within) vox (voice)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/god#etymonline_v_9016 + https://www.etymonline.com/word/invoke#etymonline_v_12201
Edit: Notice god/gheu (phonetic goy)...
Only within all moving sound can each one invoke voice aka utter speech. Doing so to suggest anything to one another (invocare; to call upon) implies spell-craft.
is good
a) All perceivable WAS before one within can suggest what IS to another.
b) Suggesting IS implies a conflict of reason against ISN'T, which each addition to what it is then perpetuates into for example good vs bad.
vote for the next kabbalistic
Kabbalah/cabbala/qibbel - "to receive; admit; accept"...voting implies consenting to the suggested authority of another, hence accepting; admitting and receiving from a chosen one.
moral consensus" that the entire world has ever known
a) Knowledge implies perceivable...ones consent to suggested moralism establishes a conflict of reason (right vs wrong), which distracts one from perceivable knowledge.
b) World/vault implies a differentiation of outside (entire) and inside (partials).
the framework to create
a) Few suggest creationism to build a frame out of mass consensus.
b) FRAME, verb - "to unite several parts into an entire thing". In reality...entire (all perceivable) generates partials (each ones perception).
Few utilize suggestion to frame many together as to confine their minds (confinement) by entering and taming their minds (entertainment) as to control their minds (government).
already in place
All (perceivable) readies each ones (perception) place.
Sleight of hand: Ready (motion) Steady (momentum) Go (matter).
pep talk
PEP; noun "vigor, energy"...perceivable sound charges; while suggested words tempt an exchange. Exchanging tempts one to ignore recharging.
Talking neutralizes energetic charges.
convince someone confused
CONvince and CONfused implies "together"...someONE implies "apart" from one another.
the division trick
Few suggest unity as meaning "together", which divides consenting many against one other within conflicts of reason about the suggested.
Somewhere along the line
A portion (life) can only exist at center of line (inception towards death)...few suggest "some" to sum up many portions aka collectivism.
Manipulation of center within line implies for example midian line (geography) or maiden lane (banking) or memory loss (psychology) etc.
will be enough to motivate
Motivation (motion) implies foundation of being (matter)...will/want tempts one to ignore that. Few suggest "enough" (Heb. to rest; that which satisfies desire) to distract many from being (life) moved (inception towards death).
broken and not worth saving
What if moving value (inception towards death) breaking down (life) cannot be saved...only sustained temporarily?
messiah
Aka mashiah/mashah - "to anoint"...each off-spring coming into being through mother/matrix/materia/mater/matter implies an anointed one being christened.
sabotage
Aka employee (perception) sabotaging (suggested) work (perceivable). Consenting to suggested sabotage implies taking a rest aka a sabbath/shabath, which makes one a shabbos goy to another.
your religion
Latin religio - "to bind anew" implies being in bondage to another, hence it ain't yours.
Suggests that enlightenment is controlled and manipulated by those within.
a) Enlightenment aka mind (ment) within (en) light...that's perceivable.
b) Light directs rays apart from one another...suggested control aka rolled (roll) together (con) tempts one to ignore that.
c) Light moves...suggested manipulate aka man (hand) pele (to fill) tempts one to manually fill, while ignoring the auto-matic foundation of light.
Implies that agreeing to mainstream beliefs means submitting to control by others.
Agreeing or disagreeing + believing or disbelieving + submitting or denying implies ones consent to the suggestion of another.
Perceivable cannot be agreed or disagreed with, nor believed or disbelieved in; nor submitted or denied without ignoring that it moves through one...no matter how one (life) reacts to all (inception towards death).
Ignorance implies the path of least resistance aka the temptation for form (matter) within flow (motion) to go with the flow instead of resisting. Others exploit this by suggesting one to follow along (progressivism) the "main stream" .
Indicates an internal manipulation of enlightenment, casting doubt on true knowledge.
a) Being implies internal ray within external light. Manipulation thereof implies internal (perception) holding onto (suggested) while ignoring external (perceivable) moving through.
b) Ignoring perceivable for suggested establishes a conflict of reason (true vs false)...which light doesn't generate; but which can be shaped within shadows.
Within these conflicts of reason; both sides are suggesting enlightenment to each other in exchange for consent given aka for ignorance of perceivable, while consenting to hold onto suggested aka by permitting another to cast and shape shadows within ones mind/memory.
To focus on suggested information implies putting a blinder on ones sight within perceivable inspiration.
casting doubt
Doubt/dubious/duo/dwo - "two"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/doubt#etymonline_v_13974
Suggested information implies casting of spell-craft; while ones consent to another one implies dual-ism aka doubt aka permitting another one to overshadow ones sight within light.
In other words...constancy (inception towards death) generates fluctuation (life) by separation/differentiation into units (Latin unitas; unus; one). Tempting units together (1+1=2) reshapes fluctuation into constancy aka equalization of differences...it's very beneficial for different few to equalize many.
misinterpreted
a) Does origin (perceivable) need to be interpreted (suggested)?
b) What if interpret implies INTER (internal; within) PER (forwards) aka being (life) forwarded (inception towards death) within origin? Could one miss that?
I provided context
a) All (perceivable) was provided before one (perception) can contextualize (suggested) towards others under the pretext of "providing".
b) Context aka CON (together; with) TEKS (to weave)...why would one, while being apart from one another, weave things together?
c) How does energy weave together particles? Why is it called PART-icle?
wrong
Can nature be wrong? Can all be wrong? Can energy be wrong? What if wrong implies being ignoring right/reg - "to move in a straight line"? ... https://www.etymonline.com/word/right#etymonline_v_15068
infiltrated by the illuminati
a) All is light; ones within cast shadows. Light can only infiltrate (fill in) shaped shadows.
b) Ones consent to suggested THE-ism implies ones submission to another, hence permitting another to "overshadow" one.
THE implies the shadow cast upon those IL (within) LUMEN (light)...
ALL...any addition contradicts that.
The suggested rhetoric "above all" is based on GESTALT; noun - "quality of perceiving a complex organization of things or events as an organized whole and also as more than the sum of the parts"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/Gestalt#etymonline_v_6048
reductionist
-ist (reductionist) implies ones consent to suggested -ism (reductionism)...a bringing together. Reduction; while bringing together implies friction.
above all
"You shall have no other gods before me"
DIS (divided against) RUPT (broken apart) IN (being within) VENT (emit outwards) ION (action)
Ignorance disrupts ones discernment about being emitted outwards (vent) within (in) action (ion) aka outwards emission (life) within action (inception towards death).
a) Compression disrupts potential. Potential implies emission outwards; which compression inwards contradicts.
b) List/lysten/lean - "to incline to one side; to please, desire, wish, like"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/list#etymonline_v_12303
Few suggest lists to tempt many to incline towards a side within a conflict of reason (pro vs contra).
Corp-orat-ion aka corpus-orate-action aka speaking death (suggested words) into life (perceivable sound).
To be implies corpse/cors - "body" within ion/action...others utilize oration to brand that body; to overload it with information; to tempt ones ignorance of being (life) moved (inception towards death).
Consenting to a suggestion by another harms one...resisting temptation heals one.
a) What's the meaning of nothing?
b) How does natural order affect the meaning of nothing?
c) Does "everything" implies order; chaos or both?