1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

take over

a) Taking tempts one to ignore given.

b) How could conflict among cattle take over a farmers field?

c) If one tries to UNDER-stand any suggested situation; then one gave OVER control to another.

2
free-will-of-choice 2 points ago +2 / -0

a) Instead of using mortar to stick bricks together...what if taking bricks apart makes mortar?

b) What makes lime sticky?

c) Viscous/weis - "to melt away; flow"...what if one can only form (life) within flow (inception towards death)?

d) If FREE will of choice, then adhesion implies...?

Baalbek. 3,300,000

Ba'al 33...

cutting stone

What if solid cutting solid can only happen after fluid cuts solid apart from one another? As in...what if artificial cut (solid vs solid) distracts from natural cut (fluid into solid)? Could few utilize artifice to distract many from nature?

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Brics/bricks aka masonry aka brick and mortar to build walls by adjoining parts into a whole aka repairing the world by bringing together (tikkun olam) aka puzzling (mosaic law)...

What do artificial bricks imply? To put together (synthesis). What does natural brick imply? To break apart (analysis).

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

The deepstate wants your children to believe

a) To believe implies wanting or not wanting the suggestion of another, which by holding onto either side, puts ones perception into a deeper state...ignorance.

b) Your children implies taking possession of...ones off-spring implies a letting go. That's the difference between wanting to hold onto and needing to let go of.

1st life

Life cannot be first, since only within the process of dying can life come into being. Only within all (cause) can each one (effect) come into being.

only chance

Chance implies "taken by choice" while ignoring balance giving choice being.

There can be only balance for each diverse choice within.

A singularity blew up into the universe somehow

a) By tricking singular units within singularity to believe in "universe" aka ones (uni) turned (verse) together.

b) Singularity cannot "blow up" into more than singularity...only internally separate into each unit. It's each unit which is given the opportunity to blow up (living) within singularity (dying).

Any animal can become anything...

ANIMAL aka anim (animation) al (all) implies all motion for each matter within. That's how everything (motion) becomes each thing (matter).

The trick...distract one within all from discerning self by shaping a conflict between human vs animal. In reality...a hue of man (human) can only come into being within animation of all (animal).

Each "human" is within animation of all, and each "animal" is within the hue of man...it's the suggested words by others which distract ones perception from discerning self.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Goyim faith and Goiym idols

Faith implies consent by each goyim; idols implies suggestions by a jew...held as physical idols and mental ideals by gentiles.

no place

Ones place implies within all: no implies ones denial of all for one another, hence a dis-place-ment...a division of position within ones mind.

This has nothing to do with...have no place in this world

Here you base the origin of what you write on NOTHING, while warning others that the outcome will be NOTHING.

steam is forced to cave in...

Aka external pressure forcing internal potential to disperse steam...

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

The origin of YOU ARE implies I AM, hence if "i am"; then "you are"...letting go of the former prevents distractions by the latter.

I AM (je suis/jesus) generates YOU (phonetic jew)...that's the conflict between ones choice and a chosen one, hidden under allegory.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

a) Versus/verto - "to turn" implies artificially turning from origin towards outcome. Origin (inception) and outcome (death) aren't in conflict with one another...it's those living within who choose conflict by turning against one another.

b) Intelligence aka inter (within) + legere/leg (to collect) implies artificially collecting (synthesis) what origin naturally separates (analysis).

c) Con (together) trol (to roll) implies the synthesis of each analytical mind into a hivemind aka collective consciousness aka group think aka gestalt intelligence aka mind coalesence aka egregore etc.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Pretending to be the opposition

Consenting to a suggestion (want or not want) establishes opposition (want vs not want) aka a conflict of reason.

The suggested information can be shaped from outside the conflict, which permits those shaping to pretend to represent both sides.

In simple...Cola vs Pepsi distracts buyers (consent) from seller (suggestion).

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

tempt

Temporary (life) within ongoing (inception towards death), hence being tempted within action (tempt-ation).

All inspires each one to resist the temptation of one another.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

science implies knowledge

Know; verb - "to perceive"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/know

Aka each ones perception within all perceivable aka the G (gnosis/gno) in-between the above/below triangle of freemasonry.

NO on the other hand implies suggested nihil-ism tempting ones de-nial of perceivable for suggested.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

science taught in school is twisted.

Science implies all perceivable moving through each ones perception. School implies suggested scientism by few teachers held onto by many students.

This holding onto among many represents consensus aka hivemind aka collective consciousness aka golem/goyim etc.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

the science we are allowed

Allow aka all (perceivable) lowering each one (perception), hence science/scio - "to know; to perceive".

It's the suggestion of theism; scientism, and pluralism (we) which tempts one to deny allowance...while permitting others to exploit it.

A lot of what you just said still could hold true even if the word DNA was just replaced with the word Body.

What if sound moves, while any word shaped within tempts one to hold onto it? What if exchanging formed words doesn't matter to flowing sound?

Cutting off love energy from body to soul.

Energy implies soul/sole cutting each body within apart from one another...love vs hate implies bodies turning against one another, while ignoring to be separated from one another.

There's no "energy from"; only...from energy.

A psy op inserted into "syience" to dissuade you from even looking into other possibilities.

a) Nature (process) generates being (potential)...science implies potential (perception) analyzing process (perceivable).

Ones consent to suggested scientism implies looking for other possibilities aka trying to synthesize possibility by accumulating potential together...that's the inversion of analysis.

b) PSYCHO implies animating power; LOGY implies circular revolution.

Nature animates being so that being can reanimate self by resisting temptation. Logic tempts beings to ignore resisting by putting a wheel onto temptation, hence living faster, while dying sooner during conflict within one another.

The OP is about making an incision (suggestion) into being (consent) to establish LOGY within PSYCHO.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

code of the personality

If by (per) sound (son) of all (al), then internal separation, not a systematic compilation of laws (code).

an actual soul does appear upon conception which results in a light flash

a) Conception implies a putting together; inception implies a setting apart.

b) Light implies actual; flash implies factual, hence only within actual light can a factual flash be shaped.

c) Soul/sole/sol - "whole; entire; all" implies whole (oneness) and each partial (one) within.

It ain't the conception of a soul by putting together; but sole generating the inception of each one within by separating apart aka the soul/sole cause of each effect within.

This soul connects to...

If it connects it wouldn't be soul/sole - "one and only" anymore.

the body...

...represents a form within flow, which allows diverse shaping of form within equality of flowing soul/sole.

Only within soul (inception towards death) can there be a body (life).

Notice body in German...Körper aka per (forward) + kör/cors (corpse) aka the living (life) dead (inception towards death).

their brain is actually powered by their soul

Not they/them plurality belonging to one, but singularity flowing through each one, hence empowering each brain/bhragno (something broken)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/brain

a strong connection between the 2 simply by acknowledging it and that is when their connection to God

a) If God implies one, then two would imply more than God...the more one counts together, the less one discerns about one.

b) If connection requires acknowledgment, then what gives one the FREE will of choice to acknowledge BINDING connections?

c) Notice that vaccination by injection implies a connection by acknowledgment...aka tempting ones FREE will of choice into self harm.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Maybe aka may/magh (to be able; have power) + be (being) implies ones free will of choice and the potential thereof.

Any suggested maybe by another tempts one to ignore this.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

a) Nature implies the electing process; each being within the selecting potential....tempted by the attraction of one another.

b) Knowing implies process (perceivable) passing through potential (perception). Thinking implies shaping both what passes through (electric perception) and what attracted one to hold onto (magnetic suggestion). Which is where one selects what to think...

c) Holding onto magnetic (suggested information) attracts more, while burdening self with it. Resisting that temptation builds resistance; drawn from the electric (perceivable inspiration) passing through.

Nature generates; resisting temptation re-generates.

d) What's the opposite of attraction...repulsion aka repel (to drive away). That's nature driving each being (life) away (inception towards death).

e) Nature WAS electric; before a magnetic conflict aka IS vs ISN'T can be shaped among beings.

tl;dr: Why is it that one needs (electric) less, but always wants (magnetic) more?

3
free-will-of-choice 3 points ago +3 / -0

a) "Judge not, that ye be not judged" ~Matthew 7:1

b) Gideon/gidh'on/gadha - "to cut off"...if one judges by suggestion; then one cuts off ones perception from all perceivable.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

your therapist...they/them

Sending free will of choice to the-rapist for some diversity, equity, and inclusion?

the next time you go see your therapist...

...would be the first time I saw one.

show them some of your posts and see if they can help you

"One is native within all and alien to one another"...can you help me making this less offensive to others?

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

The biblical figure of an antichrist does not stand in opposition to, as in our colloquially used sense of "anti".

a) A figure can only be formed within flow, which puts flow and form in opposition to one another.

b) Nature does; each being within response to being done by nature..."does not" represents a suggested fiction tempting one to ignore perceivable reality.

If God does, then "does not" implies ones denial of God. Others exploit this through spell-craft...de-nial/nihilo (nothing) aka suggested nihil-ism tempting one to de-nial perceivable. That's the origin of nothing.

c) Colloquial pertains to conversation aka con (together) vers (to turn) ation (action). God implies action setting reactions apart from one another aka causing effects.

To converse implies reactions turning against one another, while ignoring enacting cause. Others tempt one with suggested words (logos) into circular thinking (logic), which turns one against others during conflict (reason).

Colloquy aka col (together) loqui (to speak)...

d) Suggested pro (for) vs anti (against) tempts one to ignore perceivable...being a-gain (life) for-warded (inception towards death).

The word means

a) Word implies articulation of natural sound.

b) Meaning implies taking measure with mind (word) while ignoring given (sound).

c) Sound cannot be held onto, since it moves. Any instrument (mind structured within) wields the free will of choice to ignore perceivable sound for suggested words, hence burdening ones memory with articulated words aka spells crafted by the suggestion of another.

d) God gives the opportunity to measure...taking measurements ignores God given. To give implies motion; to take implies matter.

Only nature gives (inception) and takes (death) being (life)...

adjacent to

To implies "towards" aka all motion separating each matter from one another. Adjacent implies matter adjoining one another, while ignoring motion.

Adjacent (put together) contradicts to (set apart)...the former implies artificial synthesis, the latter natural analysis. The trick played on many by few...inversion.

beside the Christ but not the Christ

To anoint implies being separated from one another, hence being able to rub against one another.

Nature (god) generates being (christ) by internal separation of all (perceivable) through each one (perception) hence anointment. Others utilize suggestion to tempt consent to hold onto aka to rub against.

Christ implies each being within all of God's nature. Not implies ones de-NIAL/NAIL of being (life) moved A-CROSS (inception towards death).

will deceive many

a) Will implies each singular ones free will of choice....others suggest pluralism (many) to deceive one from discerning self.

b) Deceive aka de (to divide) capere/kap (to grasp; hold onto) implies each divided/divined one holding onto one another's suggestions aka being tempted into self deception.

the role of a Savior

Whole moves each partial (life) within a straight line (inception towards death)...that's what role of savior implies.

To keep people from actual salvation.

a) ATION implies actual; trying to keep SALVA implies fictional.

b) Being implies person aka per (by) sonos (sound) aka a separation...people implies a combination.

Few trick many to keep people together, while distracting from nature setting each person apart from one another aka each anointed one.

promise to save

Save/sol (whole) gives each one being...a promise implies a beings pledge to one another, while ignoring whole. That's how salvation gets inverted into damnation aka damning the native (nat) within action (ion).

They are all in the same way, "not Christ"

a) Same way (inception towards death) implies all for each anointed one (life) within.

b) THEY implies suggested pluralism; NOT implies suggested nihilism, THE implies suggested theism, and "all in" implies the inversion of being one within all.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

is EVERYTHING caused by parasites?

a) Everything implies cause for each effected thing within. Parasite aka para (beside) situs (to feed) implies each thing affecting one another, while ignoring cause.

b) Cause (perceivable) generates effect (perception)...parasite (suggested) tempts host (consent). If host consents, then parasite affects.

Notice also that affect is described as "mental state", while cause/effect imply the physical separation of states internally.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

You need help brotha

As in "Your questioning of the status quo requires correction; please remain where you are...the inquisition is on its way"?

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

created

a) Can you describe anything "created" without it being transformed within everything already available?

b) Here's the jewish origin of creationism (out of nothing) as the inversion of transformation (within everything)... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatio_ex_nihilo

elohim

Eloh/alah aka al (the) ilah (god)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/Allah

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

alien

For something to be evident (perceptible) there has to be a differentiation of all perceivable and each ones perception, which makes each one different from one ANOTHER aka alien/alius - "another"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/alien

because we're dumb and would instinctual worship our alien overlords as gods

Because aka being within cause implies singular unit within singularity..."we're" + "overlords" + "gods" implies plurality.

Plurality is being suggested to manipulate ones singular perception.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Claims to possess unique abilities to manipulate energy

a) Energy implies procession generating potential...possession wastes potential. Claiming implies mentally taking possession.

b) Being potential (life) within procession (inception towards death) of energy implies a unique ability aka the enabling of each one within all of energy.

c) Manipulation implies potential manipulating each other by distracting from energy separating potential from one another.

to manipulate energy for healing

Energy moves as a process through potential...resisting this implies healing; falling for it by holding onto another implies sickness.

The healthcare industry tempts patients to be patient instead of resisting, while caring/carrying health issues along for the ride...that's manipulative.

ties his abilities

To be able implies all enabling each ones FREE will of choice...no ties. It's consenting to the suggestion of another which binds ones free will of choice, hence tying the knot.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

One can only twist what's already turned against one another, hence black vs white; offense vs defense; right vs wrong; humane vs inhumane; accept vs deny etc.

A jew utilizes suggestion to tempt gentiles to consent from both sides to a mutual conflict (reason) against each other, which only then permits a jew to further twist it aka to squeeze conflict for all it's worth, hence "war is a racket"... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket

From a different angle: Holding onto one side; while fighting one holding onto the other side implies "dialectical materialism"... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialism

Holding onto white or black implies materialism. Once held onto either; both sides establish a dia-lect.

In nature...material (life) cannot hold onto either side (inception towards death) of motion. There's no dialect/argument/conflict of reason in-between inception and death...only within the mind/memory of ignorant life.

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +1 / -0

black and white...both sides

Being implies destitution (life) during purification (inception towards death)...choosing either side destroys ones sight within the visible spectrum of light.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›