The physical level we see is the lowest level. Then it's mind, soul, Spirit, the Christ and finally the Father as the highest level of reality.
- LEV'EL, adjective - "even; flat; not having one part higher than another; not ascending or descending; equal in rank or degree; having no degree of superiority".
a) suggested levels (plural) contradicts perceivable level (singular).
b) what you're describing (from all the physical to one father) represents e pluribus unum (out of many; one) and symbolically it describes a pyramid shape, hence the layering of levels.
c) consider if level represents balance (same) which implies choices (differences) at the center? That would describe many (living) within one (process of dying)...
d) what if it's choice that exists within level; surrounded by the physical; utilizing mind; soul; spirit to adapt, representing the christ (the annointed one bearing the burden of the cross); having the choice to evaluate low/high, and representing the trans-form within the female (mother) momentum of male (father) flow?
the same rules
How can a suggested plural (rules) represent perceivable sameness, when it implies different rules?
to be careful with their own actions
Being able to take care implies by free will of choice, hence a reaction within an enacting balance. Furthermore...how could reaction own anything, while being within action?
break free
What if the "break" of balance (momentum of motion) establishes "free" will of choice as its center?
Water takes the path of least resistance as it moves
a) what if water doesn't move; what if it responses to being moved by balancing; hence by finding level?
b) what if water resists surrounding temptations, trying to agitate it, by finding perceivable level instead of spending resistance within suggested conflicts?
c) motion implies from/to, hence velocity, which generates momentum (balance) for resistance within...what if water represents that resistance?
d) does the power of water comes from within or from outside agitation? If it's the latter...would outside agitation demand adaptation by inside resistance?
Ex-acting CIA
a) acting implies impression; reacting implies expression...ex-acting contradicts itself.
b) one can only express from center into surrounding...ex-C (central) contradicts itself.
election
One cannot elect (choose another) to neglect self (being choice).
The suggested "life birth record" tempts one to willingly ignore ones existence in-between inception and birth of life (within the womb).
Furthermore....consenting to any date of birth implies ones consent to the suggested calendar (register) of others, hence once again a written account of ones credit (creed; belief; faith; submission; consent) to others, which adds to ones consent to any names (corporate identities) and suggested information itself (idolatry).
One doesn't require the written; spoken; recorded; suggested confirmation by others to exist...which one needs to grow discernment of by resisting to consent what others suggest one is.
a) suggested remedies by others cannot heal dis-ease, only motion heals. Therefore; restoration (Latin restauro; Greek solid) to a sound state implies within the liquid state of sound.
b) consenting to a suggested treatment aka TREAT (negotiate; bargain; deal with; entertain; manipulate; manage; conduct towards etc.) + MENT (mind; memory) keeps the mind/memory at ease (rest), which tempts the mind/memory to ignore being a reaction to incoming force, hence in need to adapt to constant unrest (change).
flu
FLU aka INFLUEN'ZA, noun - " an epidemic catarrh" aka EPI (among) DEMOS (people) CATARRH (deflux) implies being (life) among others within flow (inception towards death).
magic
MAGIKE; noun - "art of influencing" aka artificial (suggested information) out of; within, and in response to natural flow (perceivable inspiration).
The root of magic represents magh- "to be able, have power", which implies ones free will of choice in-between artificially suggested (want) and naturally perceivable (need).
trick
TRICK, noun (Latin intrico; to fold)...perceivable whole unfolds into each perceiving partial. Others trick one by suggestion to fold it back together.
joker
The Joker suggests; the Fool consents...
- "I said the joker is a wanted man" (the many want the suggestions of the few) -" He makes his way all across the land" (rootless; dia-spora; international; global)
- "I see him siftin' through the sand" (the sandman puts people to sleep by sprinkling magical sand into their eyes)
- "So I'll tell you all the story 'bout the joker and the thief in the night" (the joker who suggestes; the thief who wants suggested more than perceivable offers for free, and the night of ignorance where the thief operates from within the shadows)
fully understand
Standing under implies underneath something bigger than self, so how could one ever be full when there's always more to fill in from?
When elite mobs spawn (you notice them by the glowing), there's better loot to gain...they're stronger than the regular grunts tho.
MARQUIS (Latin marca; frontier) DE (of) LAFAYETTE (French layette; laie; laeye: load; burden) aka Frontier of Burden aka lack of comprehension (frontier) through ignorance (burden).
The more one ignores for suggested; the less one comprehends perceivable, hence confining oneself within narrower frontiers, while burdening oneself with suggested information, upheld willingly within ones mind/memory.
a) PRICE, noun [Latin pretium; praise.] - "commendation bestowed upon"...can those within nature bestow a commendation upon nature without ignoring that nature is bestowing (perceivable value) upon those within (perceiving evaluation)?
b) GOLD, noun - "most ductile and malleable" aka DUCTILE (easy to be led or drawn) MALLEABLE (drawn out and extended by beating)...doesn't that sound like a characteristic of the many and an exploitable opportunity for the few?
see if we can get goggles you put on
- GOG'GLE, verb (Latin celo) - "to strain eyes" + STRAIN, verb - "to stretch; to draw with force; to extend with great effort".
Aren't goggles suggested to reduce strain on ones eyes? Doesn't seeing without "spectacles" takes a much greater effort than with? If a spectator implies a beholder (holding onto being), then what if being (living) represents the need to let go (process of dying), while struggling with the want to hold onto?
What if others utilize suggestion to tempt one to ignore required efforts within perceivable?
a) emission implies as form (life) within flow (inception towards death), hence center expression of impressing surrounding.
b) notice that to "direct sequences", the Wi-Fi has to be wired to a source, hence utilizing surrounding as source to emit directed sequences from its center outwards.
c) why is it called Wireless (Wi) Fidelity (Fi)? Because it requires ones consent aka ones FIDEL'ITY, noun (Latin fidelitas, fides, faith, fido, to trust.] - "faith; faithfulness" to ignore the perceivable wire for suggested wireless.
Ones consent to a suggestion by others implies SEQUENCE (following) DIRECTION (towards suggested outcomes aka progressivism)...this represents the inversion of being DISARRAY (life) within DIRECTION (inception towards death), hence needing to resist, while wanting to follow.
Consider this...the few utilize everything nature has to offer; while suggesting "money" to keep the many behind an artificial entrance fee to nature. The consent of the many represents the power wielded by the few to sustain this deception.
i'll pass on...whatever...they try and roll out in 2030.
They suggested to roll out in 2030 and you already consented to that they're doing it, hence waiting to deny the offer once it comes. Your consent gives them the power to define; redefine and contradict your reality with the suggested fiction that you're waiting for.
don't do their shit...
"don't" (doing nothing) was suggested to you by others; while you ignore being (life) done by everything (inception towards death).
Consider if all the shit they are suggesting is distracting you from your consent to suggested (fiction) over perceivable (reality)? If you comprehend this, then it becomes irrelevant what they're suggesting, only that they tempt you to consent to suggested information over perceivable inspiration.
In short...the few keep suggesting to feed the many who want suggested.
Nothing they’ve said is real.
Fiction (suggested information) can only be shaped within reality (perceivable inspiration) and it requires ones consent to ignore the later for the former.
transhumanist
a) -IST (humanist) implies ones consent to suggested -ISM (humanism), while ignoring perceivable HU'MAN, adjective [Latin humanus; Heb. form, species.]
b) suggested (humanism) out of perceivable (human; form) implies "transmutation" of ingredient out of origin.
c) HUMAN (form) implies transmutation out of ANIMAL (Latin anima; air, breath, soul aka animation aka flow)...hence form (life) out of flow (inception towards death).
- MACHINE, noun [Latin machina.] - "an artificial work that serves to apply or regulate moving power, or to produce motion"
a) motion (inception towards death) produces resisting power (life).
b) artificial (suggested information) tempts one to ignore natural (perceivable inspiration).
income that is not taxed
Perceivable income (inception towards death) generates perceiving tax (burdened life)...others suggest nothing (not) to distract one from comprehending this.
if it was a coordinated effort
Living represents ones effort within the coordinating process of dying.
arrest us all
How could those within motion be arrested (cessation of motion)? Could ones willing ignorance thereof represent "arrested develop-ment"?
I just don't know that there's a way out
What if the few suggest escapism (a way out) to tempt the many to ignore being within (life) way (inception towards death)? Is there another way for life than being moved from inception towards death?
storm the gates
Consider if ignorance of perceivable represents the gate within ones mind/memory; and that reasoning (conflict) over suggested represents the storm raging within ones ignorant mind/memory?
Afterwards...reconsider the "I of the storm"?
pacifist
-IST (pacifist) implies ones willing submission to suggested -ISM (pacifism), and those who consent to any -ISM put themselves into a conflict of reason (war vs peace).
In short...-ISM contradicts PACIFY.
Suggested numbers tempt one to ignore the unit which counts (oneself) for counting others.
different levels
Level implies balance, which a) represents momentum of motion and b) implies ones choice at the center. Therefore...same balance for difference choices. The few suggest the inversion thereof, hence multiple levels/balance for the same choice (following).
Sleight of hand: games suggesting the player to reach the end of the level or to level up.
we clearly see a differentiation
Being one implies being different from every other one. One can only see (perceive) differentiation (moving differences aka perceivable inspiration)...others tempt one to ignore this for suggested sameness, hence you ignoring one (singular) for we (plural).
Within motion, one is being pushed and pulled unless resisting. Therefore; others can follow and mislead simultaneously. Consider if it's you who is holding onto a suggested definition about what "leader" means? Leading and misleading aims different life towards the same outcome...death.
authority or group think
a) ones consent gives authority to others suggesting.
b) ignoring self by consenting to others tempts one to identify self (one) as group (we).
c) consent implies want to hold onto suggested (information); thinking requires adaptation to the need of letting go within perceivable (inspiration). The former is held within memory; while the later passes through it.
Why are they unable to question?
Those on a quest are being send away, which diminishes their ability within the here and now.
What's the problem with them?
Suggested questions and answers tempt one to ignore being perceiving problem (life) within perceivable solution (inception towards death), hence ones struggle to resist being dissolved.
You tell them something then they forget it the next day.
Consenting to suggested progressivism tempts one to let go of anything contradicting the suggested goals; outcomes; absolution etc. which progressivism dangles in-front of them.
Everything you may tell them is being perceived as holding them back if not outright offending their beliefs.
Can someone explain what's going on here?
The process of dying goes on; those living within either resist or go along with it. The majority willingly chooses to follow the suggested orders of the few, instead of being the resistance within the perceivable natural order.
their arguments both boil down to authority
To argument implies reasoning about suggested, which implies those suggesting it to represent the authority over those consenting. To cover the choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law, those suggesting are keep adding authority figures to follow (leaders); to worship (deities); to shirk responsibility onto (law givers/rule makers) or to blame (opposite side within the conflicts of reason).
they'll never go beyond that, they can't go beyond that
Because they are willingly consenting to understand aka to stand under what others are suggesting, hence shirking their response-ability (free will of choice) onto the suggested choices of others...those of the "chosen ones".
In other words...choosing among what the choices of others are suggesting does NOT represent utilizing ones free will of choice within perceivable beyond ignorance.
Reality offers everything perceivable to each perceiving ones free will of choice, hence offering partial access to whole. The suggestions of others tempt one to ignore this for dualism aka for reasoning...want vs not want; true vs false; belief vs disbelief; rich vs poor; on vs off; good vs evil etc. Whatever side on chooses represents the same choice of conflict; of reasoning against others over suggested information.
you were never a true...they're kinda right in a way
a) if reality represents change, then holding onto fictitious right or wrong aka true or false will always change. Whatever one believes to be true will be change into a false through the natural order (motion).
b) "in a way" implies being (life) within a way (inception towards death), which opens up endless more implications about ones position and response-ability (free will of choice)....unless ignored.
you always questioned your faith
Because a quest forwards contradicts the contract of faith one is holding onto. RELIGION (Latin religio; to bind anew) tricks those who consent to TETH'ER, verb - "to confine, as a beast, with a rope or chain for feeding within certain limits".
Ones consent; ones faith (christian); ones submission (islam) binds one to the suggested dogma by others, while the consented to dogma (patri et fili e spiritu sancti) tempts one to ignore the bond with those suggesting it (e nomine).
That's why I avoid talking to religious people
Ones consent to the suggestions of others represents RELIGION (Latin religion; to bind anew)...only those who adapt as free will of choice (perceiving) to the dominance of balance (perceivable) are operating outside the religious bond, the contract law with the happy merchants of temptations.
You are being deceived to view religious people by the dogma they consented to, while ignoring the contract underneath aka the willing consent of the many to the suggestions by the few. The dogma represents the written narrative aka the worlds stage, the great lie etc.
a waste of...energy
If all represents one in energy; then it cannot be wasted, since it represents a self sustaining system. On the other hand...those within energy (internal/inherent power) perceive it as temporary growth (life) within ongoing loss (inception towards death), hence being tempted to view it as waste instead of opportunity.
Take a compost heap for example...waste or generator for growth? A matter of perspective, yet both simultaneously.
if the spark is in them
Being in-between ignited (inception) and extinguished (death) implies being on fire.
Sleight of hand: "Deep inside...The pressure's high...Just to stay alive...Cause the heat is on"... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZD8HKVKneI
what they accept for reason and logic
a) LOG'IC, noun [Latin id; Gr. from reason, to speak; rhetoric]
b) reasoning represents ones acceptance vs denial of suggested information (words) by others, while ignoring perceivable inspiration (sound).
c) consent of the many to reason against each other about the suggestions of the few, gives the few the power of mass consent to define (idolatry); redefine (revisionism) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) the suggested information, while having control over both sides of every conflict of reason.
a message to freemasons
a) MES'SAGE, noun [Latin missus, mitto, to send.]...speaking into a suggested black mirror (screen) doesn't represent cause of transmission, it represents willing submission to whatever is on the mirror.
b) masons of free (will of choice) suggest others to build walls of ignorance within ones mind/memory, while utilizing each consented to information suggested as yet another "brick in the wall".
c) if one wants be heard by those with ears to hear; then one needs to resist wanted temptations, hence expressing ones free will of choice within perceivable, rather then repress it for suggestions by others.
amen...
...or AMUN aka AMEN-RA?
genesis
a) aka formation (life) by motion (inception towards death), hence implying division (sex; seco; to divide).
b) the religious connotation suggests genesis as origin aka beginning, which tempts one to ignore that ongoing motion exists before beginning (inception) and end (death) of temporary form, hence whole flow exits before partial form within.
The deception is based on suggested creationism (implies out of nothing) over perceivable transmutation (implies within; out of, and in response to everything). Base generates ingredients within itself through self differentiation.
c) a beginning without an end implies within nothing, while beginning/end in balance with each other represents momentum of ongoing motion (everything) for each temporary choice within (everyone).
d) the origin of nothing represents ones free will of choice to ignore perceivable (everything) for suggested (nothing)...hence a reaction within an enacting system.
One of the rhetorical tricks to deceive the many goes: "making something out of nothing", which represents the inversion of: "making nothing (suggestion) within everything (perceivable)"...one can only discern this by oneself within perceivable, not by consenting to the suggestions of others.
a) which side would you attribute "like" to...sameness or difference?
b) can you try to describe a system where sameness and difference coexist?
c) can you try to describe the physical/mental positions of sameness and difference to another?
d) how could one "share" sameness (simulo), while being different from it ?
Why would you label plural (events) as singular (key)...instead of your free will of choice as the key for every consequential outcome shaped within what is evident (open to be seen) by you?